Chapter 6 Tendering Awarding Contract

The APMG Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Certification Guide
© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

Some rights reserved
The APMG PPP Certification Guide, referred to here as the PPP Guide, is the Book of Knowledge
(BoK) detailing all relevant aspects of creating and implementing efficient, sustainable public-private
partnerships (PPPs). It is intended for use by PPP professionals, governments, advisors, investors,
and others with an interest in PPPs. The PPP Guide is part of the family of CP3P credentials that,
once obtained, allow individuals to use the title “Certified PPP Professional,” a designation created
under the auspices of the APMG PPP Certification Program. The APMG PPP Certification Program,
referred to here as the Certification Program, is a product of the Asian Development Bank (ADB),
the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the Inter-American Development
Bank (IDB), the Islamic Development Bank (IsDB), and the World Bank Group (WBG) part-funded
by the Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF).
“The World Bank Group” refers to the legally separate organizations of the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), the International Development Association (IDA), the
International Finance Corporation (IFC), and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA).
Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF) is a multi-donor technical assistance facility
legally administered by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD).
DISCLAIMER
The opinions, interpretations, findings, and/or conclusions expressed in this work are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or the official policies or positions of the ADB, EBRD,
IDB, IsDB, PPIAF and WBG, their Boards of Directors, or the governments they represent. The above
referenced organizations do not make any warranty, express or implied, nor assume any liability or
responsibility for the accuracy, timeliness, correctness, completeness, merchantability, or fitness for
a particular purpose of any information that is available herein.
This publication follows the WBG’s practice in references to member designations and maps. The
designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area, or the use of the term “country”
in this document, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the above
referenced organizations or their Boards of Directors, or the governments they represent concerning
the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation
of its frontiers or boundaries.
Nothing herein shall constitute or be considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges
and immunities of any of The World Bank Group organizations, all of which are specifically reserved.
RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS
This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO)
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo. Under the Creative Commons Attribution license,

you are free to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt this work, including for commercial purposes,
under the following conditions:
Attribution—Please cite the work as follows: ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG. 2016. The APMG
Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Certification Guide. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. License:
Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0 IGO
Translations—If you create a translation of this work, please add the following disclaimer along with
the attribution: This translation was not created by ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and/or WBG and should
not be considered an official translation. The organizations listed above shall not be liable for any
content or error in this translation.
Adaptations—If you create an adaptation of this work, please add the following disclaimer along
with the attribution: This is an adaptation of an original work by ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG.
Views and opinions expressed in the adaptation are the sole responsibility of the author or authors
of the adaptation and are not endorsed by the above organizations.
Third-party content— ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and/or WBG do not necessarily own each
component of the content contained within the work. These organizations therefore do not warrant
that the use of any third-party-owned individual component or part contained in the work will not
infringe on the rights of those third parties. The risk of claims resulting from such infringement rests
solely with you. If you wish to re-use a component of the work, it is your responsibility to determine
whether permission is needed for that re-use and to obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Examples of components can include, but are not limited to, tables, figures, or images.
All queries on rights and licenses should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank
Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org.

Chapter 6: Tendering and Awarding the Contract
Table of Contents
DISCLAIMER.................................................................................................... 1
RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS.......................................................................... 1
Introduction ....................................................................................................... 5
1. Where We are in the Project Cycle ............................................................... 6
2. Objectives of this Phase ............................................................................... 7
3. Special Characteristics of the PPP Tender Process ..................................... 8
4. Overview of the Phase ............................................................................... 10
5. Time to Prepare and Submit Offers: Requirements for Proper Assessment
and Preparation by the Prospective Bidders ............................................ 13
6. Managing Matters during the Bid Submission Stage in Open Tenders ...... 17
6.1. Launching the Tender Process .......................................................................... 17
6.2. Bid Stage ........................................................................................................... 18
6.3. Clarifications of the Contract and RFP ............................................................... 19
6.4. Assessing Potential Changes to the Contract and RFP ..................................... 19
6.5. Being Responsive .............................................................................................. 20
6.6. Open Meetings .................................................................................................. 20
6.7. Asking for Extensions ........................................................................................ 21
7. Qualification Matters ................................................................................... 21
8. Specific Matters on Managing Dialogue and Interactive Processes: Managing
the Dialogue Period and One-on-One Meetings ...................................... 22
8.1. Managing the Risk of Meetings with Individual Bidders ...................................... 23
9. Evaluation of Proposals .............................................................................. 24
9.1. Administrative or Compliance Check ................................................................. 25
9.2. Evaluation Committees ...................................................................................... 25
9.3. Price and Quality Evaluation Process ................................................................ 26
10. Negotiation with a “Preferred” Bidder ....................................................... 28
11. Award ....................................................................................................... 30
11.1. Challenging an Award Decision ....................................................................... 30
11.2. The Issue of No or Only One Responsive Proponent ....................................... 31
12. Contract Signature .................................................................................... 32
12.1. Prior Conditions ............................................................................................... 33
12.2. Clarification versus Changes ........................................................................... 33
12.3. Will the Contract be made Public? ................................................................... 34
12.4. Debriefing of Bidders ....................................................................................... 34
13. The Financial Close .................................................................................. 34
14. Oversight / Integrity of the Tender Process .............................................. 36

15. Outcomes of this Phase............................................................................ 36
References ..................................................................................................... 37
Appendix A to Chapter 6: Bid Preparation and Submittal – The Private Sector
Perspective............................................................................................................... 39
Boxes
BOX 6.1: Learning Objectives .......................................................................... 6
BOX 6.2: Conditions for a Successful Tender Process .................................. 10
BOX 6.3: Targeting Potential Bidders as Part of the Prelaunch...................... 18
BOX 6.4: Staged versus Streamed Evaluation. When is a Streamed Evaluation
Appropriate?............................................................................................. 28
BOX 6.5: ‘Standstill Period’ in EU Legislation ................................................. 31
Figures
FIGURE 6.1: Where We are in the Process Cycle ........................................... 6
FIGURE 6.2: Open Tender: One- and Two-Stage Processes ........................ 12
FIGURE 6.3: Dialogue or Interactive Process: EU Competitive Dialogue ...... 13
Tables
TABLE 6.1: Examples of Bidding Periods in Different Countries .................... 15
TABLE 6.2: Examples of time periods between contract signature and financial
close ......................................................................................................... 35

Introduction
This phase covers the period from the launching of the project to the point of
financial close. This chapter assumes that the government has chosen to tender
the project, rather than negotiating directly with a potential private sector
contractor. The benefits of choosing a tender process are discussed in chapter
1.
During the Structuring Phase, explained in chapter 5, the tender process has
been designed, including qualification criteria, evaluation criteria, and the
requirements for submission of both qualifications and proposals.
As explained in chapter 5, in relation to the tender process, the tender package
will also include regulations on timing (deadlines for the submission of
qualifications and proposals, the time limits for asking for clarifications, and the
expected timing of any dialogue phase), as well as other regulations related to
any dialogue or interactive types of processes.
Regardless of the level of detail in the Request for Proposal (RFP), the tender
process must be managed proactively to drive value through competition and
ensure that obstacles and threats do not jeopardize the process. In a dialogue or
interactive process, the procuring authority will face special challenges in
managing the dialogue or interaction in order to preserve confidentiality while
maintaining transparency and fairness in the process. Specific information will be
provided in this chapter on this issue.
As there are a range of distinct tender processes (see appendix to chapter 4),
this chapter sets out the main milestones and activities that are present in all
processes to be handled by the procuring authority through the selection and
awarding of the contract. It also includes specific information on dialogue and
interactive processes1.
In addition, despite the fact that this PPP Guide is structured around the vision
and needs of the procuring authority, the special appendix included in this chapter
will present the views of the future private partner. This describes how the private
sector partner needs to organize and manage the tasks of bid preparation and
submission, as well as executing the contract and raising the finance to
commence the works.
1 For the sake of simplicity, the explanation of the process will not include the fact that in some processes
the proposal may be staged. This involves submitting at least two proposals, the initial and the final offer.

BOX 6.1: Learning Objectives
Readers will be able to:
• Understand the mechanics of the approvals/authorizations necessary
through to financial close
• Manage any potential need for changes or re-scheduling in the
procurement process
• Handle the qualification and evaluation processes
• Understand the need for any conditions prior to contract signature
• Understand the distinction between commercial close and financial
close, and the key elements of the financial close process.
1. Where We are in the Project Cycle

During the previous phase, the contract structure was developed (with particular
attention to financial and risk elements), the tender package was drafted, and
authorization was sought to launch the tender process. See figure 6.1.
This phase covers the period from the launch of the project (which may be
through a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) stage or by directly issuing an RFP in
some jurisdictions), through the process of qualifying bidders, receiving and
evaluating proposals, to the contract award and financial close stage.
At the end of this phase, the procurement process ends and the Contract
Management Phase begins (contract management is discussed in chapters 7
and 8).
FIGURE 6.1: Where We are in the Process Cycle

2. Objectives of this Phase
The objectives of this phase are as follows:
• To conduct a smooth procurement process and avoid interruptions and re-

scheduling;
• To deliver a contract that will demonstrate Value for Money (VfM) and will
benefit both parties;
• To secure a prompt, rapid, and effective approval for signature;
• To handle the selection process in an effective manner, ensuring
transparency;
• To ensure that, at the time the PPP contract is executed, the government
will have a high degree of certainty that the winning bidder will secure the
required financing and deliver the required outcomes according to
schedule; and
• To effectively utilize competition to deliver the optimal Value for Money
outcome for the government.
To meet these objectives, the procuring authority must:
• Design the RFP appropriately: The procuring authority’s ability to

manage the tender process as smoothly as possible, and maximize value
through competition, will depend on the regulation of the tender process
(time, requirements of the offers, qualification/selection criteria, and
evaluation criteria), that is, the design of the RFP (as explained in chapter
5);
• Apply general principles of good procurement: Many features and
characteristics of the PPP tender process are the same as in any public
procurement process. The same general principles of good procurement
will apply for a PPP procurement (transparency, fairness, and so on).
Transparency in tendering is the essence of a fair and competitive
process. The tender process should meet international standards for
transparency and provide a level playing field for bidders;
• Recognize the complexities of PPPs: While general principles of good
procurement apply to PPPs, PPPs also have special characteristics that
must be considered in the conduct of the tender and awarding processes.
These special characteristics are set out in section 3;
• Recognize the specific characteristics of the project: Each project will
have unique requirements. These requirements must be addressed both
in the structuring and drafting of the tender package (discussed in chapter
5), and in the conduct of the tender and awarding processes (discussed in
sections 4 to 13); and
• Follow the applicable laws and policy requirements governing
procurement in the relevant jurisdiction: The PPP tender process must
be adapted to the applicable laws and policy requirements governing
procurement in the relevant jurisdiction. These laws and policy
requirements are affected by a wide range of factors, including the overall
legal system and the past historical experience that the government has
7

had of contracting with the private sector. Consequently, there is
significant variation in the tender process from one country to another.
Nevertheless, the underlying principles and objectives of the process are
much the same everywhere. In some cases, the general laws and policy
requirements governing procurement will not be well suited to the specific
needs of PPP projects, as outlined in section 3. Therefore, if the objectives
set out are to be realized (see chapter 2 for a discussion of the
establishment of an appropriate PPP framework), the government will
need to put in place specific requirements for PPPs, rather than relying on
general laws and policy requirements.
3. Special Characteristics of the PPP Tender Process

Most of the features and characteristics of the tender process will be the same
as in any public procurement process, but some stages and steps have specific
characteristics and features. Special considerations inherent to the particular
complexities of PPPs are listed below.
• Time to prepare and submit offers: This will usually be longer than in a
conventional procurement. Due to the intricacies of the PPP processes
(including complexities faced by the private partner), it is essential to grant
the bidders sufficient time for proper due diligence, analysis, and
assessment of the project and the contract from different fronts. This is
discussed in section 5;
• Interaction with the market/bidders: As explained in previous chapters,

an initial interaction/communication process should be carried out before
the tender launch occurs. However, some interaction should also take
place during the tender process to better inform bidders about the project,
and to clarify potential inconsistencies or amend unintended errors in the
wording of the RFP and the contract (see section 6). In some countries,
more extensive interaction occurs (this is discussed in section 8). A
balance needs to be found so as not to endanger the legality of the process
and potentially suffer a challenge that may paralyze the process or require
the government to re-issue the tender;
• Risks of challenges to the process: Due to the incremental complexity

of the contract and process, the risk of a challenge is considered higher in
PPPs than in a conventional procurement. In addition to the possibility of
a challenge by an unsuccessful bidder, in some countries it may be
possible under administrative law for the wider public and civil
organizations to challenge the process if their interests conflict with the
nature and objectives of the PPP. There may also be non-legal routes to
challenge the process (for example, by applying political pressure). Some
bidders may be willing to force a project cancellation because they may
not be ready enough to participate (which links to the first concern

expressed above about allowing sufficient time to bid). The risk may be
exacerbated in countries in which both the public and private sectors lack
PPP experience. As such, there are no shared expectations as to how the
process will unfold. Management of challenges to the process are
discussed in section 11;
• Time for evaluation: Evaluating PPP bids is a more complex matter than
evaluating conventional contracts. PPP evaluation requires a knowledge
of both the PPP’s technical and financial features, including the
particularities of the technical proposal and how it interacts with the
financial sustainability of the offer.
The room for potential non-compliance with the proposal requirements is

significantly larger than in a conventional procurement.
Linked with the higher risk of challenges is also a need to be accurate and
stick with the rules and methodology for bid evaluation (and
selection/qualification) as described in the RFP (section 9. discusses the
practicalities of evaluation management); and
• Contract signature or commercial close2. Prior conditions: In a PPP,

management of the contract signature process is more demanding for both
the public and private parties. A longer period is required to allow the
private partner, as awardee, to prepare for signature, especially (in some
jurisdictions) the need to form a special purpose vehicle (SPV) that will
sign the contract.
There are usually some other prior requirements for contract signature,
such as contracting (or booking) insurance and providing definitive bonds
or guarantees (in lieu of the bid bond). In some cases, the financial model
must be audited prior to contract signature, while in other cases this may
be delayed until financial close (for those contracts that allow for arranging
finance after the contact signature). Section 11 explains these issues
further.
Taking into consideration those special features of a PPP tender process, the box
6.2 proposes a list of conditions to be met or areas of specific care when
preparing and conducting a tender process.
2 “Commercial close” is another term for contract signature.

BOX 6.2: Conditions for a Successful Tender Process
• The project should have a clear strategic direction and strong political
support.
• The procuring authority should establish a sufficiently resourced and
capable team that will be credible in the eyes of bidders.
• Good planning and program management practices should be
implemented throughout the process.
• The RFP, including submission requirements, should be carefully
drafted (see chapter 4) and should be consistent and clear.
• Appropriate relevant information should be provided to bidders through
pre-bid conferences and a data room (in addition to the RFP).
• The evaluation criteria should be as objective and clear as possible.
• The evaluation criteria should not be changed during the process.
• The qualification and evaluation work should be organized in advance
(including an internal manual for evaluation).
• The formal evaluation process should be conducted by an appropriate
expert team and managed properly (for example, decisions by the
procurement board should be clearly recorded with reasons given).
• Strong capabilities and resources should be available to manage last
minute interactions and potential challenges, as well as for evaluation
and qualification.
• The time for bid submission should be realistic.
• A realistic timeline should be set for award and contract signature
(including time for evaluation and award and for preparation for
signature).
4. Overview of the Phase

Generally, there are four main stages into which any tender process may be
divided.
• Pre-qualification (in open tenders with a pre-qualification stage) or short

listing (in a process with a short listing or pre-selection of candidates);
• Bid period – from launching through bid submission or reception (in open
tenders without pre-qualification) or from invitation to offer (or to negotiate)
through bid submission in other processes;
10

• Bid evaluation (including qualifications in a one-stage open tender) and
award — the procuring agency receives, analyzes/assesses, evaluates,
and selects a winner (usually named the preferred bidder)3; and
• Contract signature (from decision to award to the signing of the contract)
— financial close may occur at the end of this period or at a later time after
contract signature.
The actual outline of the process and a more detailed description of the phases
will vary depending on the tender process type (see appendix A to chapter 4).
At one extreme of the spectrum of tender process types is the one-stage open
tender: the RFP is issued together with the RFQ. Here the qualification criteria
are published in the same package of documents, and at the same time as the
evaluation criteria and the requirements to propose, together with the proposed
PPP contract. Submission of qualifications is concurrent with the submission of
the proposals.
In this process, the stages or periods may be described as follows.
• Tender advertising and issuance;

• Bid preparation (from RFP launch to proposal submission);
• Evaluation of qualifications and proposals (from bid submission/reception
to award);
• Contract signature (from award to signing of the contract); and
• Financial close.
The main variation of the open tender process is the two-stage open tender with
pre-qualification. This is where the pass/fail test of qualifications is done in a
previous stage and the RFP is issued, or candidates are invited to propose, only
after the qualification process has finished. Figure 6.2 illustrates the one- and
two-stage open tender processes.
3 Negotiation is a variation that may be present in any of these processes, and several proposals are
sometimes considered before a final proposal is requested in some processes.
11

FIGURE 6.2: Open Tender: One- and Two-Stage Processes
Note: RFQ= Request for Qualification; SoQ=Submission of Qualification.
At the other extreme of the spectrum of variations, there are various interaction
or dialogue processes. Any interactive process is very different to the standard
open tender process structure. The RFP is discussed or clarified through
interaction during the bid preparation stage, or there may even be dialogue to
define the contract solution through the dialogue stage (competitive dialogue in
the European Union [EU]). This type of process has the following stages or sub-
periods.
• Qualification preparation (up to submission of qualifications);

• Evaluation of qualifications and selection of short-listed candidates;
• Dialogue/interactions, bid preparation, and bid submission: from invitation
to engage in dialogue (or to engage in an interactive processes) to
proposal submission;
• Evaluation of proposals (from bid submission to award decision); and
• Contract signature (from award to signing of the contract).
Dialogue and interactive processes work best in mature PPP markets and may
be difficult to implement in some developing countries.
Figure 6.3 illustrates the competitive dialogue type of process used in the EU.
The main difference between this and the highly interactive process used in
Australia and New Zealand is that in the former, the RFP and the contract may
evolve progressively through the dialogue process, whereas in the latter the
interaction focuses less on changing the RFP or the contract, and more on
enabling bidders to progressively develop their bids, receiving feedback from the
government as they do so.
12

FIGURE 6.3: Dialogue or Interactive Process: EU Competitive Dialogue
Note: RFQ= Request for Qualification; SoQ=Submission of Qualification.
The main difference in terms of management and process between open tender
types of process and those involving a dialogue or structured interaction resides
in the dialogue or interaction phase. The other challenges of the tender in terms
of process and management are the same as in other procurement methods. In
this context, in all of them the authority will have to qualify and evaluate offers to
select the awardee and subsequently manage the contract signature process.
The subsequent contents of this chapter introduce issues regarding the
management of the bidding stage (sections 5 to 7), and specifically the
interactions in dialogue or interactive processes (section 8).
The rest of the chapter then explains the main actions to be undertaken by the
authority to handle the key milestones that are common for any tender type: the
process of evaluating and selecting the awardee, including negotiating with a
preferred bidder if the PPP framework allows for this (sections 9 to 11), and taking
the project through to a successful execution of the contract (section 12), and
financial close (section 13).
5. Time to Prepare and Submit Offers: Requirements for Proper

Assessment and Preparation by the Prospective Bidders
As introduced in section 2 of chapter 5, it is essential to give the bidders sufficient
time to prepare a sound and high quality offer. Especially in open tender models,
one of the common pitfalls in a PPP procurement is that the procuring authority
allows bidders insufficient time for this work.
This project failure may take different forms. It may result in there being no bids
because bidders did not have time to prepare a reliable offer in sufficient detail to
be acceptable to their board(s). It may be due to the submission of hurried, poor
quality bids that will be disqualified — or worse still, it may result in the submission
(and selection/awarding) of an inadequate offer by a bidder that assumes it will
13

have the ability to re-negotiate what is initially considered as an unfeasible
project.
It is good practice for the framework to establish a minimum time for bid
submissions, which in most jurisdictions is at least 30 days. However, even the
specified minimum time may not be sufficient, depending on the complexity of the
project (in technical, financial, and even legal terms) and the degree of advance
preparation required. Therefore, a decision must be made on a project-by-project
basis as to whether a longer period is required than the minimum specified in the
framework.
When defining the period/time limit for bid submissions, it is essential to grant to
the bidders sufficient time for a proper analysis and assessment of the project
and the contract from several different fronts.
• The technical bid and construction contract will be delivered in a more risky
context than a traditional procurement. The “contractor” (here the private
partner) is assuming more significant risks regarding construction (both in
terms of costs and time). These will need to be meaningfully assessed and
managed by transferring them (or most of them) to the sub-contractor
(even if the construction contractor belongs to the very same company
group as the investor and prospective bidder);
• Financial or commercial feasibility is a particular dimension of the
practicality of a PPP route. It requires bidders to assess the feasibility of
the project in overall terms. The revenues projected in a user-pays project
or in a government-pays project must be sufficient to cover all costs and
recover investments. Bidders must also test whether the bid will be
bankable (the risk perception of the bank or lender may not necessarily be
the same as that of the bidder). The capital costs estimated by the bidder
(including debt and equity in terms of minimum target economic internal
rate of return [eIRR]) may not be in accord with the original assumptions
made by the government when the project was initially appraised and
structured. A bidder’s perception of risk and its value (in terms of risks
premiums) may also differ;
• Assuming that the project as structured, including any government
payments or support, is commercially feasible from a bidder’s perspective
(that is, there is some room for competition in terms of price), the bidder
needs time to optimize its cost structure: negotiating with
suppliers/contactors and refining the financial structure to optimize capital
costs;
• Usually the bid is submitted by a group of companies using a joint venture
or consortium approach. This requires complex agreements (shareholder
agreements) that demand time for negotiation and implementation in
advance of the offer;
• Bidders will usually require approval from their boards. Time must also be
allowed for this approval process;
14

• When the government requires bidders to develop the financial package
in advance of the bid submission, additional time is needed to allow for the
lender’s due diligence and approval processes; and
• Finally, the proposal itself, in terms of documenting a response that meets
the government’s submission requirements, needs significantly more time
than in a conventional procurement (see chapter 5.8.1).
At the same time, it may also be dangerous to allow too extensive a time period
for bid preparation. A PPP bid is more demanding than a conventional
procurement in terms of resources (internally dedicated, plus advisers), and time
is in essence a matter of costs. Looking for the right balance is therefore a tricky
issue, which is often solved within a range of 30–90 days for open tender
processes, although in many projects 90–120 days may be preferable to ensure
good quality responses (see table 6.1 below).
Also, a common mistake is to initially rely on unrealistically short periods for
submission, while planning to correct the situation later by providing an extension.
Extensions should generally be the exception to the rule because changes to the
time table are perceived as a lack of reliability and may adversely affect the PPP
reputation of the procuring agency. However, it is better to give an extension if
the alternative is project failure because no bids are received.
This is less of an issue in dialogue processes where dialogue occurs before the
procuring authority issues the final RFP because the time allowed for dialogue is
designed to allow the prospective bidders to assess the project and prepare their
offers.
In some two-stage processes, where the government requires bidders to submit
comprehensive proposals (for example, extensive designs and committed
finance), a longer period between the issuing of the RFP and the receipt of bids
is appropriate. For example, in Australia this period is typically in the realm of 150
days.
Table 6.1 sets out examples of the actual bidding periods (including extensions)
for a variety of projects in a number of countries.
TABLE 6.1: Examples of Bidding Periods in Different Countries

Bidding
Period
Country Project Sector Tender Process
(number
of days)
Abastecimento de
Água Potável e Single-stage open
Brazil Water/wastewater 33
Esgotamento tender
Sanitário (Sumaré)
15

Cavite-Laguna Single-stage open
Philippines Road 70
Expressway tender
Hospital da Zona Single-stage open

Brazil Health 106
Norte (Amazonas) tender
Two-stage tender
Ravenhall Prison with short listing and
Australia Prison 147
Project interactive tender
process
Two-stage tender
Gautrain Rapid Rail with short listing and
South Africa Rail 180
Link interactive tender
process
16

6. Managing Matters during the Bid Submission Stage in Open
Tenders
The following section applies to any open tender process, including those with
a previous pre-qualification phase. In processes with such a pre-qualification
phase, the RFP is only issued when the qualification process has been
concluded.
6.1. Launching the Tender Process4

Launching is the milestone that triggers the tender process. Tender documents
are published through standard government processes, often in the official
government bulletin or journal, on a centralized procurement website, or in
regional or national newspapers.
Sometimes, in the case of procurement by sub-national governments, a tender
notice is also published in the central government bulletin. In the EU member
states, a public tender also needs to be made public in the EU Official Journal
(OJEU).
In some countries, prospective bidders must register or pay a fee in order to
receive the RFP.
In some jurisdictions (for example, the EU), the tender must be pre-announced
a certain number of days in advance of when the actual tender process starts
and the RFP is published. That pre-announcement is intended to ensure that
as many companies as possible are aware of the project. It describes the main
characteristics of the project and the tender: tender method, type of contract,
the contract value5, and so on.
These standard government processes are often contained in general
procurement rules. However, this will not necessarily ensure that the project
comes to the attention of the full field of potential bidders.
Regardless of the specific process required to formally launch the tender
process, the procuring authority should implement a pre-launch strategy that
ensures potential bidders are aware of the project, as well as the planned timing
of the tender process. This enables bidders to ready themselves for the launch
and properly resource their bidding teams. When the procuring authority has
not conducted a structured testing and marketing process during the Structuring
Phase (see chapter 5.6.), it would be necessary for the procuring authority to
4Under a two-stage open tender process, the initial invitation is only for the submission of qualifications
which are assessed to confirm the list of candidates that will be invited to tender.
5 Contract value is usually the volume of capital expenditures (Capex) estimated by the procuring
authority, or sometimes refers to the total amount of payments to be made by the procuring authority if
the bid equals the ceiling on payments.
17

conduct at least a pre-bid information meeting or presentation prior to the
release of the invitation to tender, sharing information in relation to the tender
process and the project.
Box 6.3 sets out some of the communication channels that may be included as
part of a prelaunch of the PPP project.
BOX 6.3: Targeting Potential Bidders as Part of the Prelaunch
The procuring authority should ensure that it targets potential bidders that
are likely to be interested in the project and capable of delivering it. A range
of communication paths may be considered, including:
• Publishing information on the internet.

• Advertising in the regional, national, and international press.
• Advertising in trade publications.
• Press releases.
• Road shows.
• Providing information through embassies.
• Providing information through industry associations.
6.2. Bid Stage

The bid stage occurs with the issue of an invitation to tender to the deadline for
bid submission.
This stage is, by definition, a private sector stage. During this time, prospective
bidders assess the project and the proposed contract, and prepare their bids
(appendix 6A explains the bid preparation process from the perspective of a
bidder).
However, the procurement team must manage the following tasks during this
phase.
• The procurement team and the procuring authority will usually do

preparatory work for the evaluation phase by defining evaluation teams
and governance. If following best practice, this includes the preparation
of an evaluation manual;
• If the evaluation team does not have past experience in this form of
evaluation, it is good practice to conduct a training session for evaluators
to ensure a consistent understanding of how the evaluation is to be
conducted;
18

• There may be a bidder conference after the issue of the invitation to
tender, at which the procuring authority presents key features of the
project to potential bidders. Bidders may also be given the opportunity
to make site visits during this time. These activities must be carefully
managed by the procurement team to ensure transparency and fairness
of the process;
• The procurement team will need to manage any data room through
which information is made available to bidders (see chapter 5 for a
discussion of the use of data rooms); and
• Questions and requests for clarification will be received during this
period until the deadline for question submission is reached. The
deadline is necessary so that the procuring authority has time to issue
proper responses and clarifications.
6.3. Clarifications of the Contract and RFP

It is good practice for the procuring authority to allow requests for clarification
of the contract and the RFP, but the procuring authority should retain discretion
about whether to respond. The procuring authority should provide a response
wherever this will assist bidders to provide a better bid and not undermine the
RFP process.
A clarification in the true sense does not amount to a material change in the
RFP or the draft contract; it merely removes ambiguity or uncertainty in the mind
of bidders as to the meaning of those documents. Clarifications are important
to ensure that bidders correctly interpret the government’s requirements.
Responses should be made available to all potential bidders and will usually be
regarded as part of the RFP package (good practice). However, they will not
prevail over the original text of the RFP unless the original text is specifically
amended6.
6.4. Assessing Potential Changes to the Contract and RFP

As a result of questions asked by bidders through the clarification process, it
may become apparent that the procuring authority needs to materially change
aspects of the contract, tender requirements, or criteria.
6 Note that in some two-stage processes, if allowed by the procurement rules, it may be appropriate to
only provide a response to the bidder who asked the question, as the question and response may relate
specifically to that bidder’s proposal and may be irrelevant to other bidders. Where this option is allowed,
great care must be taken in its application to ensure that a response provided to only one bidder does not
give that bidder an unfair advantage.
19

Conducting a proper appraisal and structuring/drafting process, through
meaningful assessment and preparation, is the best route to avoid this risk.
However, if the procuring authority faces a situation in which prospective
bidders request changes in order to make the project commercially feasible, the
authority will have to decide whether such changes are really needed to avoid
receiving no bids, or whether that risk is worth taking.
If requests for change are considered reasonable and the change is affordable
for the procuring authority, that change will usually require an extension to the
bidding period (unless the change occurs early in the bidding period). It is good
practice to provide such an extension. However, it may be necessary
(depending on the legal framework of the respective jurisdiction) to cancel the
process and re-issue the tender. This depends on an assessment (in legal
terms) of whether the clarification or the change is substantial.
Another option, if allowed under the relevant framework, is to release the RFP
and provide bidders with an opportunity to comment, then re-issue the RFP and
require bidders to accept the reissued version before releasing the data room
and draft transaction documents. Formal acceptance of the RFP can protect
the procuring authority against subsequent objections from losing bidders. This
approach can be beneficial if the project is novel or complex, and the procuring
authority sees value in obtaining very specific feedback on the project structure.
In this process, bidders are likely to provide more carefully considered and
detailed feedback than in an earlier market sounding process.
Similar issues arise if the procuring authority identifies that additional data that
was not originally in the data room should be provided to bidders. The procuring
authority must manage the risks associated with late release of such
information. An extension of the bidding period may be appropriate to allow all
bidders to fully consider the additional information and adjust their bids
accordingly.
6.5. Being Responsive

The procuring agency should be responsive to the requests for clarifications,
providing appropriate answers in due time to give prospective bidders the best
opportunity to provide high quality bids.
6.6. Open Meetings

During the bid submission period, it is good practice to have interim open
meetings with prospective bidders to present responses to the questions and
facilitate the provision of any information relevant to the process (for example,
if a government is retaining the responsibility for land expropriation, progress
on this should be reported). Such meetings are usually held with all bidders
20

collectively, although in some processes there may be separate meetings with
each individual bidder. See section 8 for further information on the conduct of
such meetings.
6.7. Asking for Extensions

It is common for bidders to formally or informally ask for extensions to the bid
submission deadline, claiming a lack of time to prepare the bids.
When one or more bidders request an extension, others might be ready to
submit; therefore, an extension may produce an unfair disadvantage to those
bidders who are prepared to submit on time. However, if an extension is not
given, there may not be enough competition. The procuring authority should
assess the situation and find a balanced response, taking into account any
other external factors that may have delayed the bidders (such as extended
public holidays).
In addition, an extension to the submission period may, like any other material
change, be perceived by the market as a sign of volatility and lack of
commitment by the government.
The best practice in terms of dealing with time issues is, as stated before, the
setting of a realistic deadline based on a properly prepared project.
7. Qualification Matters
In a one-stage process with open tender, qualifications are presented at the
same time as the offer. The procuring authority must first assess qualifications
before evaluating the bids. Separating these two steps sequentially is generally
regarded as good practice, and some jurisdictions regulate the process in this
way through their legal framework to protect transparency.
In a two-stage open tender (pre-qualification), or in interactive or dialogue
processes, qualification is done in advance of inviting the candidates to prepare
and submit the bid (or to participate in a dialogue or interaction).
In two-stage processes, an issue can arise if there is a change in the
composition of a bidding consortium between pre-qualification and the
submission of bids. The RFQ should specify whether this is allowed, in what
circumstances, and what consequences may follow. Some flexibility in
consortium membership can be desirable to enable a pre-qualified consortium
to bring in additional organizations that can strengthen its bid. However, a
consortium should not be allowed to continue in the process if its composition
changes such that it would no longer be capable of meeting the pre-qualification
requirements. The procuring authority should minimize the likelihood of
21

changes in consortium membership by ensuring that there is not an unduly long
period of time between pre-qualification and bidding.
Otherwise, the considerations regarding proper management of the pre-
qualification process are the same in one- and two-stage tenders. In some two-
stage processes, there is an added task of evaluating the qualifications in order
to select a short list of candidates.
The main considerations relating to a proper qualification process (and also
applicable to the evaluation process) are as follows.
• The essence of the assessment procedure is the RFP (or RFQ, if using
a two-stage process);
• Qualifications must be assessed in accordance with the criteria
announced and described in the RFP (or in the RFQ in a two-stage
process). Deviations from the criteria and methodology laid out in the
RFP are not consistent with the transparency needed and will likely
result in challenges to the outcome (see chapter 4 for a description of
typical qualification criteria);
• The team whose task it is to assess the qualifications must be sufficiently
skilled in the respective areas involved; and
• A manual or a set of established procedures used to assess the
qualifications is important to further document the process and methods
that are to be applied. This is especially the case, for consistency
purposes, when more than one person will assess any particular criteria
or sub-criteria. However, any manual that is developed should remain
consistent with all the criteria described in the RFP (or the RFQ).
8. Specific Matters on Managing Dialogue and Interactive

Processes: Managing the Dialogue Period and One-on-One
Meetings
In addition to the need to select or pre-select the candidates in a short list (see
chapter 5.6.4), the competitive dialogue processes (and other interactive
processes) have a number of particular and common issues.
These relate to the special stage of interaction or dialogue where the technical
requirements and commercial drivers of the contract are discussed or even
proposed by the prospective bidders (the latter being the case with competitive
dialogue in the EU).
• The interaction process itself (meetings, information to be submitted

beforehand, feedback from the candidates, and so on) has to be
managed well in terms of time;
• Confidentiality has to be managed concurrently with fairness of the
process and transparency;
22

• In competitive dialogue, changes to the basic specifications and/or the
basic business terms have to be respected. However, these must clearly
be identifiable as improvements; and
• Due to the small number of short-listed bidders, specific situations such
as a bidder withdrawing from the tender process are critical in these type
of processes.
These and other matters are treated in detail in the main guides available
internationally. While most of them are tailor-made for specific markets, many
of the issues described and the solutions proposed are useful for any process
in any country which contemplates this type of process within their legal or
policy PPP framework7. A decision to use competitive dialogue or another
highly interactive process should only be made after carefully assessing
whether the procuring authority has the capability and capacity to effectively
manage such a complex and intensive process.
Detailed below is some basic information on managing meetings with individual
bidders, which are a key feature of this type of process8.
8.1. Managing the Risk of Meetings with Individual Bidders

Having separate meetings with each potential bidding organization or
consortium can provide better outcomes than only having a single meeting
attended by competing organizations. However, meetings with individual
bidders also entail a range of risks. The better outcomes arise because
meetings with individual bidders enable greater depth of discussion, and
potential bidders may be less willing to discuss their concerns or issues in front
of competitors but be more willing to do so in a meeting where competitors are
not present.
The risks of conducting such meetings include the greater demand on the time
and resources of the government team, and the potential (either in reality or as
matter of perception) for one bidder to be given information not provided to
7 Australia’s National PPP Guidelines (2011), Volume 2: Practitioners’ Guide, appendix E provides
extensive information on management issues in interactive tender processes. The joint United Kingdom’s
(UK’s) Office of Government Commerce/HM Treasury Guidance on Competitive Dialogue (2008) also
provides infromation on key issues during the dialogue stage in its section 5.3.
8 How to Engage with the Private Sector in Public-Private Partnerships in Emerging Markets, PPIAF,
World Bank – Farquharson, Torres de Mästle, and Yescombe, with Encinas (2011) includes an interesting
case study that explains the process followed in the tender of a hospital in South Africa (see page 126).
The tender process was based on a two-stage process with significant interaction and dialogue (including
one-on-one meetings) with the short-listed consortia before bid submission. The case study illustrates,
among other things, how sound governance of the tender process is essential, including a structured
evaluation process leveraging separate evaluation teams and internal and external scrutiny that ensured
a high level of transparency.
23

other bidders, thus compromising the fairness of the process. As a matter of
good practice, a number of measures are used to mitigate this risk.
• Rules for conduct of the meetings are circulated to all participants in

advance;
• If the meeting occurs prior to the release of the RFP, a project
information memorandum is circulated to all participants in advance, and
additional information is not given during the meetings;
• The government uses a pre-prepared script during the meetings to
ensure that, as far as possible, the same questions are answered in the
same way in each meeting;
• At least two government representatives attend each meeting (more
than two may be appropriate to minimize the risk of allegations of
impropriety);
• The process is well documented through records of attendance and
minutes of the meetings;
• In some projects, the questions and answers are circulated to all bidders
in de-identified form, without disclosing any information specific to an
individual bidder; and
• In some projects, an independent party is appointed to attend the
meetings and to provide confirmation that no bidder was given an unfair
advantage over other bidders.
Even if meetings with individual bidders are held, it is often also beneficial to
conduct a forum or presentation at which all bidders are present. This provides
an efficient forum in which the government can convey key messages in relation
to the project.
9. Evaluation of Proposals
As with assessment of qualifications, proposals must be evaluated in
accordance with the criteria set out in the RFP. In this sense, there will be an
important difference in terms of process between price-only evaluation and a
combination of quality and price criteria. The latter is clearly more complex, and
the discussion below focuses on this approach.
The information contained in this section is applicable to any process type,
including dialogue and interaction processes.
As noted in section 3, evaluating PPP bids is a more complex matter than
evaluating conventional contracts, and the risks of non-compliant bids and of
challenges to the process are accentuated in PPPs. The main corrective factors
for these risks are having clear rules for evaluation and robust evaluation
decision-making processes. It is paramount to engage highly capable and
experienced resources to carry these out.
It is also good practice to set up a practical guide or evaluation manual for the
project to ensure consistency among different reviewers/evaluators, including
24

that they understand any potentially unclear or ambiguous terms in the
evaluation criteria.
A clear audit trail of all of the evaluation steps, discussions, and decisions
should be maintained.
9.1. Administrative or Compliance Check

The first step in evaluation is a review of formal requirements, which is also
called the ‘administrative requirements’ of the proposal. This involves
confirming that the bid was submitted as required by the RFP, checking that
powers and signatures are valid, and confirming that the bid complies with a
number of general legal requirements. These may include checking that there
are no unresolved issues with the tax authorities or that there are no impending
prosecutions for corruption or a fraudulent act. The absence of any such issues
means that an organization is sometimes referred to as being in “good
standing”. These checks must be carried out before the evaluation (in strict
terms) of the proposal is made.
In two-stage processes, these reviews will be part of the pre-qualification
process and will then be re-checked at the RFP stage.
While the initial compliance check will identify obvious issues (such as missing
signatures or missing parts of the bid), more subtle non-compliance issues
might only be identified during the evaluation itself (for example, a technical
proposal that omits some requirements, or an alternative bid where these were
excluded). The RFP and the evaluation manual should document the process
for dealing with such issues.
When there are errors that may be regarded as “remediable”, it is customary to
give the bidder an opportunity to correct them. This should always be limited to
immaterial errors and not basic elements of the proposal. If the bids are made
public under transparency principles, any errors and the corrections should also
be made public.
9.2. Evaluation Committees

Where the assessment has significant subjective/qualitative elements, it is
important to have that evaluation performed by subject matter experts.
In some cases, the subject matter experts may be government employees, in
other cases they may be external advisers/consultants.
For example, according to EU legislation, when subjective/qualitative
assessment represents more than the 50 percent of the total weight of
evaluation criteria, the authority must constitute an expert committee including
the presence of independent experts.
25

If the evaluation is conducted by external advisors/consultants, it is good
practice to structure the process so that the decision to recommend a bidder to
the awarding authority is a decision made by government employees on the
advice of the external advisers/consultants.
9.3. Price and Quality Evaluation Process

As explained in chapter 5, the most common type of evaluation process is
based on a combination of criteria.
In this context, as introduced in chapter 5, there are two approaches, which
may be regarded as good practice: a streamed process and a consecutive or
staged approach. Factors relevant to the choice between these approaches are
discussed in box 6.4.
When the evaluation process does not allow complete separation of
technical/qualitative criteria from financial/numerical criteria, it is paramount
(and considered good practice) for transparency purposes to carry out the
evaluation in a structured streamed process9. In this sense, apart from the
administrative conformity/compliance, the evaluation work should be divided
into the following concurrent streams (in terms of process management).
• Evaluation of the technical offer and other potential valuation drivers

subject to qualitative assessment; and
• Evaluation of the economic/price offer and potentially other numerical
criteria.
In many jurisdictions, rather than streams, these sub-processes of evaluation
will be done consecutively in separate stages. In some cases, this is a legal
requirement (prescribed by law, for example, in EU legislation) with the
authority obliged to seal the completed technical or qualitative evaluation before
opening the financial/economic offer envelope. In many countries, this process
occurs in a public venue.
There are different techniques to organize and perform the qualitative
evaluation work and to ensure that processes and criteria are applied
consistently across bids. For example, having each individual consistently
evaluating the same sub-criteria across all bids, having each evaluator
assessing one bid under all sub-criteria but then discussing with other
specialists the results to ensure consistency, or having multiple evaluators
jointly assessing bids against sub-criteria through a consensus process 10.
9Further reading on evaluation matters may be found in Infrastructure Australia (2011) National Public
Private Partnership Guidelines. A discussion on the bid evaluation process can be found in these
guidelines in section 12 of the Volume 2 (Practitioners’ Guide).
10 As introduced in chapter 4, it is not uncommon and may be considered good practice to establish a
floor for technnical scoring so that no offer with less than x points in technical evaluation (or y points as
26

If the rules of the tender process allow bidders to submit alternative offers along
with their primary bid, the evaluation process must identify how each bid (the
base bid and the alternative bid) will be treated — for example, by evaluating
each of these as separate bids, providing the base bid has met all of the
administrative and compliance requirements and the alternative bid has met
any requirements set out in the RFP for such bids.
In some projects, the evaluation criteria are such that the evaluation can be
enhanced by developing a performance model to aggregate and systematically
and objectively assess input data from bidders. However, this requires an up-
front investment in development of the performance model, validation that the
model correctly links the inputs to the evaluation criteria, and transparency in
the process. In some (but not all) cases, the evaluation criteria will be such that
the performance model can be developed from the financial model for the
project.
Most of the potential approaches to evaluation are valid as long as they respect
transparency and fairness, and in this sense they will ensure consistency in the
interpretation of the evaluation criteria and sub-criteria. For this reason, as
noted, it is good practice to develop a manual for evaluation.
It is important to keep the different elements of the evaluation separated by
physical and informational barriers, that is, those involved in the technical
evaluation should not have access to details of the financial evaluation and vice
versa. This ensures that evaluators’ perceptions are not influenced by aspects
of the bid that are not relevant to the specific criteria they are evaluating.
Regarding the financial offer, the evaluation panel will have to consider the
consistency and responsiveness of each of the offers (some processes require
certain documents to be in the financial envelope rather than in the technical
envelope11). Analysis of the financial offers can be complex, and it is good
practice for the evaluation panel to obtain detailed independent analysis of the
financial offers by finance specialists. Time should be allowed for this. The
evaluation panel (or the awarding authority) may even reject some offers
because they are potentially considered in “temerity12”, that is, underbidding too
aggressively, or for other reasons described in chapter 5. In some processes
minimum in some specific sub-criteria) will be qualified. Rather, it will be rejected (and the price or
economic offer will also be rejected).
11For instance, the requirement to submit a financial offer with the bid under reasonable terms for the
commitment and availability of finance.
12 “Temerity” refers to an offer made on terms that might be considered reckless, in the hope of winning
the project and subsequently being able to negotiate a more favorable outcome. In some jurisdictions (
for example, in Spain), it is customary to establish a threshold of temerity in relative terms. For example,
any offer that is below the average bid by more than 15 percent will be considered too aggressive for the
purpose of evaluation. According to Spanish legislation, the authority may give the bidder the opportunity
to explain and argue the rationale of that offer, and additional security may be required by the authority to
ensure the availability of funds.
27

the financial offer will be subject not only to quantitative/numerical evaluation,
but to some qualitative assessment as well.
Only after this check and definition for responsive offers will it be possible to
announce the awardee under the final scoring calculation.
BOX 6.4: Staged versus Streamed Evaluation. When is a Streamed Evaluation

Appropriate?
Many countries conduct a staged evaluation process, as described in the main text,
sequentially performing the technical/qualitative evaluation and then the
financial/economic evaluation. This is a well-tested approach and may be particularly
appropriate if the government is seeking an acceptable technical solution at a good
price, and there are significant concerns about corruption or undue influence in the
process.
However, some countries (generally more developed countries with significant PPP
experience) have processes in which bidders can offer different (innovative)
solutions. These may require amendments to the contract that will be specific to each
bidder, or they may create different risk or cost exposures for the government. In such
cases, a separate decision cannot be made on price, but there must be a parallel or
“streamed” technical/qualitative and financial/economic evaluation because there
may need to be discussion between the technical and financial evaluation teams to
ensure the implications of the innovative solutions are properly understood by each
team and the evaluation is conducted on a consistent basis.
For example, it would be inappropriate for the technical evaluation team to score a
proposal on the assumption that the government will accept an offer of a higher level
of service from that bidder, but for the financial evaluation team to assess the price
on the basis that the government will only pay for the base level of service assumed
in the RFP. In this evaluation process, the evaluation teams may talk to one another
about elements of the bidders’ proposals. However, they should respect the strict
separation of the actual evaluation against the evaluation criteria — that is, a team
evaluating one of the criteria should not discuss its evaluation of bids against that
criteria with another team not involved in evaluating that criteria.
10. Negotiation with a “Preferred” Bidder

A major difference between procurement approaches in different countries is in
the extent to which the government enters into negotiations with the “preferred”
(but not yet successful) bidder following the evaluation process, but prior to the
award of the contract.
28

The need for post-bid negotiation can arise for a range of reasons, including
those listed below.
• The RFP requirements or draft contract may not have been clear, but
this may not have been identified during the RFP clarification process.
This may arise if a bidder thinks the RFP is clear but they have
interpreted it differently from government’s intention;
• The RFP requirements or draft contract may not have been acceptable
to bidders and their lenders (in particular, with respect to the proposed
risk allocation);
• The wording in the draft contract may have assumed that bidders would
meet the RFP requirements in a particular way, but the preferred bidder
may have chosen a different solution that nevertheless meets the RFP
requirements. For example, the RFP may allow the equity to be invested
in the form of share capital or subordinated debt, but the contract may
have been drafted on the assumption that the equity only consists of
share capital. Therefore, some negotiation may be required to ensure
relevant clauses in the contract appropriately apply to subordinated debt;
and
• The bidder’s proposal may have been sufficiently clear for the purposes
of the evaluation, but some details that were not material to the
evaluation may be unclear or poorly worded, and the government may
wish to negotiate clearer, more precise wording.
In each of these situations, negotiation can enable the parties to reach a
mutually agreeable position. It also reduces the risk of issues arising later in the
life of the project due to a lack of clarity in the documentation or a lack of
consistency between the bidder’s proposal and the contract. However,
negotiating at any stage can be challenging, and negotiation creates a risk of
reducing the transparency of the bid process.
The challenge can be even greater once a preferred bidder has been identified,
as the preferred bidder will consider itself to be in a strong position in the
negotiations, even if a reserve bidder is maintained as a fallback option. For
this reason, care should be taken during the structuring of the tender and the
contract to ensure that the documents are clear and the risk allocation will be
acceptable to bidders – see chapter 5.
If negotiations are required, and are allowed under the applicable framework,
the negotiation process must be carefully managed to ensure that legitimate
issues are resolved without the preferred bidder gaining a better position at the
expense of the government.
Due to the risks associated with negotiation, some governments do not allow
negotiation of the terms of the contract at any stage of the process (although
room for negotiation on bidders’ proposals may remain).
Once any negotiations have been completed, it is good practice to require the
preferred bidder to resubmit its proposal, amended to reflect the negotiations.
29

It is also good practice for the government to assess whether the proposal, as
updated, retains Value for Money, and whether it remains appropriate to award
the contract to the preferred bidder.
11. Award
After the tender is evaluated according to the relevant criteria provided in the
RFP and any negotiations are satisfactorily completed, the award decision is
made by the relevant authority, usually based on the recommendation made by
the evaluation team.
In some countries/jurisdictions, this does not imply a definitive selection
because endorsement of the decision may be required at a higher level (for
example, by the cabinet). Alternatively, bidders may challenge the evaluation
decision within a certain time limit, which is known as a “standstill period” (see
box 6.5). A standstill period, with challenges prohibited after that period expires,
can be beneficial to ensure that any challenges to the process are made
promptly and not strategically deferred by the losing bidders.
If any necessary endorsement has been received and there are no appeals, the
award decision will become definitive and, in some countries, will be published
in the respective official journal (although this is not a universal practice). After
official or definitive awarding, the winning bidder (awardee) will be called for the
contract signing.
In some jurisdictions (but uncommonly), it may be necessary at this point to
obtain the authorization or validation of a general attorney and/or of a general
auditor, or it may even be necessary to obtain a ratification by the legislature.
If there is a delay in the awarding process beyond the timelines provided in the
RFP, the procuring authority should consider whether the winning bidder will
still be capable of meeting the contractual milestones and the commitments
made in its bid. It may be necessary to agree to revised dates as a result of the
delay — although if the changes are substantial, this may provide a basis for
other bidders to challenge the award decision. The best means to mitigate this
risk is to establish realistic timelines for the award process from the outset, and
to ensure that decision-makers understand the risks associated with delays.
11.1. Challenging an Award Decision

As noted in section 3, the risk of a challenge to the tender or award process is
considered higher in PPPs than in a conventional procurement. To mitigate this
risk, the procuring authority must have sound preparation and procurement
processes, and a legal team and relevant subject matter experts prepared to
handle potential challenges — including the ability to resolve disputes in the
interests of moving the process forward.
30

Challenges may come after tender launch, or after award of the contract. In the
latter case, they will usually be based on potential deviations from the
evaluation and selection rules set out in the RFP.
If there is a legal challenge to an award decision, the procuring authority must
engage legal resources and relevant subject matter experts to respond to the
challenge and defend the award decision. A typical process for such challenges
is that a judge will analyze the challenge and may decide to reject it.
Alternatively, the judge may temporarily suspend the awarding process so as
to analyze and judge the matter more carefully. Or the judge may declare the
award decision invalid, which may result in an award to the second ranked
bidder. In a worst case scenario, it can even lead to a suspension of the process
with the need to re-tender the project contract, depending of the country’s
normal practice.
BOX 6.5: ‘Standstill Period’ in EU Legislation
As the European PPP Expertise Centre (EPEC) PPP Guide describes13,

according to the EU legislation, “a minimum ’standstill period‘ of 10 days is
required between the PPP contract award decision and the actual conclusion
of the contract to allow rejected bidders time to conduct their review and
decide whether they want to challenge the award”.
“An aggrieved bidder can bring an action to have the PPP contract rendered
ineffective if the authority contravened EU procurement rules in a serious
manner. Previously, the sole remedy that an aggrieved bidder could seek
was to be awarded monetary compensation, but nowadays an aggrieved
bidder could seek cancellation of the PPP contract. How the various rights
and obligations of the parties will be determined in this case is left to national
law.”
11.2. The Issue of No or Only One Responsive Proponent

It is possible that no bidders will submit, which constitutes a clear process
failure. This is best avoided by having a well-planned and well-structured tender
process, consistent with the practices described in chapter 5 of this PPP Guide.
If it does eventuate that there are no bidders, it is not uncommon to grant
additional time for bid submissions when there is evidence that time
insufficiency was the cause of the failure. Otherwise, the process will be
suspended, and it might be re-tendered after adjusting the structure or
13See How to Prepare, Procure and Deliver PPP Projects (EPEC 2012). http://www.eib.org/epec/g2g/iii-
procurement/31/314/index.htm
31

requirements — if there is evidence that the lack of responses can be remedied
without compromising the VfM.
A variation of this situation is when there are proposals but all of them are
regarded as irresponsive (typically due to a lack of financial or commercial
feasibility – this can be related to an insufficiently high price ceiling or possibly
other factors related to risk). In such cases, it is not uncommon for the authority
to open a negotiation process with the best proposer, while a redefinition of the
project (subject to a reassessment or re-appraisal) may be more appropriate.
It is also possible that only one bidder submits (or more than one bidder
submits, but only one meets both the qualification requirements and the
requirements of a valid bid). This can place the procuring authority in a difficult
position. If the project was unattractive to all other potential bidders, this may
reflect a poorly structured project that is unlikely to succeed. The sole bidder
may also be overly ambitious and have an unrealistic expectation that it can
deliver the project.
The procuring authority is in a weak bargaining position if it chooses to engage
in direct negotiation with the sole bidder, as there is no alternative bidder to turn
to if a satisfactory outcome cannot be agreed. Some governments prevent this
situation arising by requiring that there be a minimum of two valid bids in order
for the procuring authority to award the contract. Other jurisdictions seek to
protect the government’s position by limiting which aspects of the bid can be
subject to negotiations. For example, the Philippines’ PPP Implementing Rules
and Regulations allow direct negotiation with a sole bidder, but only with respect
to the proponent’s financial proposal and its rate of return. Hence, the sole
bidder cannot try to negotiate a change in the risk allocation. Nevertheless,
negotiating with a sole bidder on this basis may not provide a good outcome
(for example, because the sole bidder has met the requirements necessary to
have submitted a valid bid, but the bid may offer very poor Value for Money). It
is therefore good practice for the procuring authority to reserve the right to
terminate the tender process if only one valid bid is received, and to re-tender
the project or seek an alternative solution in these circumstances.14
12. Contract Signature

Once the contract has been awarded, the necessary steps are taken to proceed
to the signing of the contract by both parties.
Upon award, the successful bidder (called the ‘preferred bidder’ in some
markets) will be required to sign the contract within the period prescribed in the
RFP.
14 For further information on sole bidder situations, see Competitive Dialogue in 2008. OGC/HMT Joint
Guidance on Using the Procedure (UK Office of Gov. Commerce, 2008) – BOX 5.7. “Market failure and
single bidder situations”.
32

12.1. Prior Conditions
Before the deadline expires, the successful bidder will have to meet certain prior
conditions as established in the RFP. The following conditions are typically
included.
• Establishment of a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) that will be the

concessionaire;
• Contracting of insurance policies (or in some cases, proving that
insurance is available under the terms required by the RFP and contract)
and providing any performance guarantees required in favor of the
authority; and
• Financial close: In some jurisdictions, financial close (that is, the
execution of the financial agreements) is a prior condition in the sense
that it is simultaneous to the commercial close (contract signature).
Alternatively, contract signing does not occur until all other preconditions
to financial close have been satisfied – this matter is explained in the
section 13 below.
Once the prior conditions are fulfilled, the PPP contract will be signed with the
SPV, and the successful bidder will officially become a contractor.
If the winning bidder is not able to fulfill all of the conditions before the deadline
or refuses to sign the contract, the public authority may apply liquidated
damages and/or make a call against the bid bond (when a bond or guarantee
was required with the bid submission). If that occurs, the authority will usually
call the next ranked bidder to sign the contract or may decide to re-issue the
tender.
12.2. Clarification versus Changes

During the course of this period, it is common for both the authority and private
partner (still as preferred bidder or successful proposer) agree on certain minor
changes in the contract to resolve mistakes or clarify ambiguities. It may also
be necessary to incorporate specific features of the winning bidder's proposal
into the contract according to some practices (while in others, the offer is
directly considered a part of the contract).
However, in most of the jurisdictions, any material change that would potentially
result in another bidder bidding differently (if they knew of the change), is
forbidden. This is good practice in terms of PPP strategy and framework. In
these cases, the border between a clarification and a change may be subtle
and such changes requested by the preferred bidder should be carefully
assessed by the procuring authority before it decides whether to agree to them
— even at the risk of the contract not being signed and a need for re-tendering.
33

12.3. Will the Contract be made Public?
Chapter 2.9.3 of the PPP Guide explains the importance and significant benefits
of transparency and proactive disclosure in PPP programs. It also provides
examples of disclosure policies that are considered to be good practice. In
some jurisdictions, it is compulsory to publicly release the contract as-signed.
If the contract is made public, it is good practice to redact any genuinely
proprietary or commercially sensitive information where disclosure may
disadvantage the winning bidder by making this information available to
competitors. Failing to redact such information may deter companies from
bidding. In addition, in some projects (such as those in the defense or prison
sectors) the government may need to exempt some contractual material from
disclosure for public interest reasons.
12.4. Debriefing of Bidders

It is good practice for the procuring authority to debrief both the successful and
unsuccessful bidders after the contract has been executed. In each case, the
debriefing should not focus on the relative merits of the bids. Rather, it should
be directed at providing each bidder with general information on how it can
better meet the government’s expectations in future projects.
13. The Financial Close

Financial close is a stage with a high degree of variation in market practice
among jurisdictions. Financial close means not only that the financing
documents have been signed, but also that the prior conditions for the
availability of financing have been fulfilled.
As described in chapter 5, in some jurisdictions (for example, in Spain), the
contract provides a limited time (which might be as little as six months or as
much as eighteen months) after contract signing in which the private partner
must arrange finance and execute the financial agreements. In some other
jurisdictions and processes (typically negotiated or dialogue processes),
bidders have already arranged the finance prior to contract award, and financial
close occurs soon after commercial close (the process can take anywhere from
a few hours to several weeks, depending on the circumstances). Chapter 1.7.3
contains a discussion about these two different approaches.
Table 6.2 provides example projects of the actual time periods that elapsed
between contract signing and financial close in various countries.
34

TABLE 6.2: Examples of time periods between contract signature and
financial close
Project Government Contract Financial Time

Signing Close Period
(Days)
Ravenhall Prison Victoria, 15 16 1
Project Australia September September
2014 2014
Development of Maharashtra, 6 May 2014 2 180
Fourth Container India November
Terminal at 2014
Jawaharlal Nehru
Port
Mactan-Cebu Philippines 22 April 22 244
International Airport 2014 December
Passenger Terminal 2014
Building
No matter when financial close occurs, that milestone will have implications for
the authority. In all cases, the authority will have to validate the financial
agreements to check that they do not contravene the provisions of the contracts
or represent any direct risk or additional responsibility not considered in the
contract. It is common for the authority (especial in emerging markets) to
acknowledge the contract and specifically validate the lender´s rights as agreed
and described in the contract (for example, the lender’s rights to step-in and
cure defaults).
The authority may also make direct contractual representations to the lenders
(through direct agreements or direct letters). These are not necessarily direct
guarantees in favor of the lenders15, but nevertheless these representations
give the lenders comfort that they will be able to exercise their rights in respect
of the project should the need arise.
During this period, there is a degree of alignment between the authority and the
private partner. It is generally in both parties’ interests to promptly achieve
financial close so that this finance is available for the project to proceed.
Another typical issue that may have implications for the authority during the
financial close period is the use of the base interest rate risk-sharing
mechanisms (see chapter Appendix to chapter 5). In some projects, the
15 Direct guarantees in favor of lenders may also be established in the contract; this may be the case in
both emerging economies and developed economies, or it may be that the government is a financial
partner of the Special Purpose Company (SPC). Both situations make clear the need for and relevance
of proper management processes, and have direct implications of the financial close for the authority.
35

procuring authority will bear part or all of the risk that base interest rates change
in the period before financial close.
14. Oversight / Integrity of the Tender Process

Some governments provide for independent oversight of the tender process
while it is occurring to ensure that it is fair and transparent.
For example, governments in Australia and New Zealand appoint a probity
practitioner to ensure that a transparent and robust process is followed at all
times. The probity practitioner is independent of the project team and is
responsible for monitoring the bidding process and for assessing and reporting
on whether the process has been conducted to the required standards.
Probity practitioners typically have legal or accounting backgrounds, and they
are appointed on a project-by-project basis. They are able to receive any
complaints or concerns raised by bidders during the process so that the issue
can be dealt with at that time rather than exposing the project to a challenge
later when an award is made. They attend all of the critical stages of the
evaluation process, such as the opening of the bids and the meetings of the
evaluation committee, and at the conclusion of the evaluation they confirm that
it has taken place in accordance with the applicable requirements. The
Philippines is introducing a similar process for large projects.
In many countries, auditors-general also have a role, conducting ex-post audit
reviews of the conduct of PPP tender processes.
A further measure to protect the integrity of the tender process is to place the
onus on bidders to avoid corrupt practices and to ensure that, if a bidder
engages in corrupt practices, the terms of the tender process allow the
procuring authority to take remedial action such as:
• Cancelling the bidder’s appointment as preferred bidder or contractor;

• Calling any bid bond; and
• Suing for damages to recover from the bidder the costs of the procuring
agency as a result of the corrupt conduct, including the costs of re-
running the procurement process if necessary.
15. Outcomes of this Phase

At the end of this phase, the authority has in place an enforceable and effective
contract, duly executed after the accomplishment of prior conditions.
In some processes, financing has been arranged within this phase (as a prior
condition to contract signature), while in other processes it will be arranged
before construction commences. This can be either because of a condition
36

embedded in the contract or as a practical consideration, since the standard
approach by any investor will be to only commence work after financial close.
It is good practice for the procuring authority to conduct a “lessons learned”
review of the tender process to identify examples of good practice and areas
for improvement in future projects. Where relevant, the lessons learned should
be shared with any central PPP agency and with other procuring agencies of
the same government that are undertaking PPPs. In some instances, it may be
beneficial to also make a subset of the lessons available to the public to better
inform bidders for future projects.
The end of this phase represents the start of the life of the contract and the
concurrent "contract management" period. Therefore, although the tender and
award phase may have come to an end, the public-private partnership is only
just beginning.
As explained in the next chapter, a contract management strategy must be
established at contract signature. It is usual for the preparatory work and the
establishment of the contract management framework to be done in parallel
with contract signature and even during the bid preparation stage.
Throughout the contract management period (either during the Construction
Phase or the Operations Phase), the contract may be affected by risk events,
potential disputes, and potential changes in the scope of the contract or in the
service requirements.
References
Name of Document Authors/Editors Description htpp link (when

and Year available)
Key References for PPP Tender Processes
Infrastructure Australia Commonwealth of Includes guidelines on PPP tender http://infrastructur
National PPP Guidelines Australia (2011). processes, and the management eaustralia.gov.au/
Volume 2: Practitioners’ of interactive tender processes. policy-
Guide publications/public
-private-
partnerships/files/
Vol_2_Practioners
_Guide_Mar_201
1.pdf
Online Toolkit for Public PPIAF (2009). Includes a description of PPP http://www.ppiaf.o
Private Partnerships in tender processes. rg/sites/ppiaf.org/fi
Roads and Highways World les/documents/too
Bank lkits/highwaystool
kit/index.html
World Bank Reference Guide World Bank Includes a good summary of the http://ppp.worldba
Volume 2 (2013). key issues related to PPP tender nk.org/public-
processes. private-
partnership/library
37

/public-private-
partnerships-
reference-guide-
version-20
The Guide to Guidance - How European PPP Includes an overview of the key http://www.eib.org
to Prepare, Procure and Expertise Centre steps in the bidding process, /epec/g2g/iii-
Deliver PPP Projects (EPEC) (2012). finalization of the PPP contract, procurement/31/3
and financial close. 14/index.htm
Public-Private Partnership Asian Includes an overview of the key http://adb.org/site
Handbook Development activities related to PPP tender s/default/files/pub/
Bank (2008). processes. 2008/Public-
Private-
Partnership.pdf
Other References and Readings cited in this Chapter
Competitive Dialogue in UK Office of Gov. Describes the process and key http://webarchive.
2008. OGC/HMT Joint Commerce issues to consider when nationalarchives.g
Guidance on Using the (2008). conducting a competitive dialogue ov.uk/201106012
Procedure as regulated by the European 12617/http:/ogc.g
Union (EU). ov.uk/documents/
OGC_HMT_2008
_Guidance_on_C
ompetitive_Dialog
ue.pdf
Disclosure of Project and World Bank A review of practices regarding http://wbi.worldba
Contract Information-in Institute (2013). the disclosure of information on nk.org/wbi/docum
Public Private Partnerships PPP projects and contracts. ent/disclosure-
project-and-
contract-
information-
public-private-
partnerships
How to Engage with the PPIAF, World Includes an interesting case https://openkno
Private Sector in Public- Bank - study that describes an wledge.worldb
Private Partnerships in ank.org/bitstre
Farquharson, example of a tender
Emerging Markets am/handle/109
Torres de process, which illustrates a
86/2262/59461
Mästle, and number of the features 0PUB0ID1710
Yescombe, discussed in this chapter. Box358282B01
with Encinas PUBLIC1.pdf?
(2011). sequence=1
FIDIC Procurement International A general guide to the http://fidic.org/site

Procedures Guide federation of procurement of engineering s/default/files/proc
consulting ur-promo-doc05-
Engineers (FIDIC, and building works projects 3.pdf
2011). of all sizes and complexities
(not specific to PPPs).
38

Appendix A to Chapter 6: Bid Preparation and Submittal – The
Private Sector Perspective
39

6.1 Introduction and Purpose
This section describes the approach taken by the private party in a PPP project.
The private party is the private sector entity that is successful in securing the
right to implement and operate the procuring authority’s PPP project. A variety
of names may be used to describe this private party. These terms include the
private partner, the consortium and the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV). Such
terms are interchangeable and this section uses all of them.
In this section, it is assumed that the private party is responding to a greenfield

PPP project that is being procured by a public authority under a one-stage,
single tender process, all as outlined in the previous chapter. It is assumed too
that during the biding stages of the procurement, the private party will put in
place indicative funding arrangements and that these will be finalized, with the
provision of fully committed funding, at the financial close of the PPP project.
It should be noted that the activities carried out by the private party, described
in this section, may be the same if the procurement is for a brownfield PPP
project, or if the project is a privatization or secondary market transaction. On
a related note, many of the activities may also be carried out as part of certain
non-PPP procurements (see chapter 1), such as Design-Build-Operate (DBO),
or Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Manage (DBFOM) management contracts
and concession/lease arrangements. However, consideration of these types of
procurements, and the specific activities required of the private party to
implement them, is outside the scope of this PPP Guide.
In this section, an account is given of the various stages of the private party’s
PPP pathway, highlighting some of the key activities that it will carry out at each
stage.
This section describes the factors that influence the private party’s decision to
invest in a particular country and, specifically, to respond to the procuring
authority’s Request for Proposal (RFP). It sets out how the private party puts
its PPP project tender response together. This is a process that includes
forming a bidding consortium and appointing advisors, right through to
developing its commercial strategy and detailed technical, financial and legal
solutions for the PPP project.
PPP projects involve the planning, design, construction, and provision of a PPP
project asset together with the provision of associated services, such as the
operation and maintenance of that asset. They also require a significant amount
of financial support. Achieving this requires a series of agreements to be
completed.
40

It is not simply the project agreement that needs to be entered into with a
procuring authority; the private party will also need to enter into a suite of
agreements with its construction, operation, and maintenance contractors, as
well as the funders who will be providing financial support. A description of the
required set of agreements is explained in this section. The key issues that have
to be addressed by the private party, before entering into these agreements,
are also highlighted.
Attention is also focused on the type of finance the private party can obtain for
the PPP project, the lending requirements that must be met, and the stage at
which fully committed funding is provided.
A description of the private party’s role at the concluding stages of the PPP
project’s procurement, commercial close, and financial close is provided.
Additionally, a note of the key activities that the private party needs to carry out
in order to form the SPV is included in this section.
An overview of this section and its key learning points is set out below.
Targeting and Selecting Markets and Projects
The decision to select a PPP project depends on the region/country, the

sector/market, and the project itself. The PPP project must be evaluated in
commercial, financial, and risk terms once the RFP has been released (PPP
project screening).
If the PPP project screening is sound, the private party will decide to participate
in the bid. Resources should be spent only when the decision to participate in
the bid is positive.
Putting a Bidding Consortium Together
A biding consortium includes four key private partners: sponsor(s), construction

contractor(s), operations and maintenance contractor(s), and the lender(s) to
the consortium. Sponsors must look for potential/like-minded partners in order
to develop a winning bidding team.
The selection of bidding partners should be based on common goals, common

cultural values, practical experience, and value (not price).
The consortium will be structured and operate in accordance with contractual

arrangements such as the Letter of Intent, the confidentiality agreement, the
41

Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), and the Consortium Agreement (CA).
The parties involved in the consortium will agree to the work each party needs
to carry out in order to prepare and submit the consortium’s bid. The cost of
carrying out such work will be agreed and shared between the consortium’s
members.
The Consortium Agreement will anticipate the basic terms of the future project
and project company governance, including the decision-making process.
Project governance over the Tender Phase is assumed by the steering

committee and is supplemented by the sponsors and the bid manager.
The steering committee decision-making mechanisms must be designed to

resolve disputes and conflicts of interests among partners.
Getting Advisors on Board
One of the first matters the consortium has to deal with is the appointment of
external advisors. External advisors provide general support, expertise, and
resources to prepare tender documents on time. The areas covered during the
tender stage are technical, legal, and financial in nature.
Determining the Corporate Structure of the SPV and the Structure and
Type of Contracts Entered into by the Private Party
The SPV is the vehicle that implements the PPP project. It is comprised of
shareholders, and will adopt a limited recourse structure with project obligations
being passed through to the construction and operation and maintenance
(O&M) contractors. These contractors may be members of the consortium if it
is structured in such a way that they will be both future equity shareholders and
contractors.
The SPV needs to ensure that all its project agreement obligations are made
completely known to the key PPP project contractors.
Preparing and Submitting the Technical, Financial, and Legal Proposals
The preparation of the consortium’s bid involves the completion of technical,

financial, and legal proposals. While these proposals are being prepared, the
consortium will develop and agree on the structure of the project vehicle to
implement the PPP project. The consortium will also agree to the matrix of
42

contracts that will be entered into between the project parties, assuming that
the project is awarded to the consortium. These contracts will set out the
obligations of each PPP project party, the level of risk they will assume and
manage, and the level of award/remuneration they will receive.
The technical proposal will have to be endorsed by the construction and O&M
contractors and the sponsors. Equally, the financial proposal, and notably the
financial strategy and the risk/award assessment will need to be endorsed by
the sponsors. Similarly, the legal details will need to be endorsed by the
sponsors.
Bid Preparation and Decision to Submit
Only when an investor decides to participate in a tender does the bid

preparation actually start. In parallel to the bid preparation, investors will carry
out the project’s due diligence to decide whether or not to proceed with the
submission of a response to the RFP.
Preparing a bid does not necessarily mean making a decision to invest. The
decision to respond to the RFP is made only if some conditions/targets are met.
Technical Issues
The technical process will provide two main outputs: the technical bid package
and the assessment of costs, specifically capital expenditure (Capex),
operating expenditure (Opex), and life-cycle cost (LCC). These technical
outputs will be taken into account in building the financial model/outputs and
the price negotiations for construction and O&M.
Financial Issues
The financial team will identify and help obtain the best sources of project
finance, such as debt and equity. The financial model reflects the financial
structure of the consortium’s proposal. It will also be used as a tool to help refine
the financial impact of any changes to the consortium’s proposal that might be
agreed during negotiations with the procuring authority and/or the PPP project
funders.
43

Legal Issues
The legal team will review the procuring authority’s documentation, and it will
prepare the legal package to be submitted to the sponsors (for their
endorsement) and the procuring authority as part of the tender response. It will
draft and agree the heads of terms (HoT) relating to the construction and O&M
contracts, as well as the drafting of the contracts themselves. The legal team
will also draft the shareholders’ agreement and the finance legal documents. It
will also ensure a complete pass through of the consortium’s obligations into
the construction and O&M contracts.
Fundraising
Fundraising is a process that starts during bid preparation. However, it is only

concluded after the award of the PPP project to the consortium. Before funding
is provided, the funders will want to ensure the robustness of the project risk
allocation. Funders will ensure they are protected against the adverse effects
of PPP project risks through terms included in the finance documents and the
security package.
The credit/loan agreement is the key financing document. Meeting the required
financial ratios, such as loan life cover ratio and annual debt service cover ratio,
help to ensure the financial robustness of the project.
Commercial and Financial Close
If the consortium successfully secures the award of the procuring authority’s

PPP project, then it will normally be referred to as the preferred bidder. From
the date of its appointment as the preferred bidder, the consortium will be
required to complete a number of activities to ensure that it is able to enter into
the project agreement at the required time. These activities will include finalizing
all the PPP project contracts, including the construction and O&M contracts,
and forming the SPV.
When all of the PPP project’s commercial issues are agreed and solved then it
has achieved commercial close. Financial close occurs when the PPP project
funding becomes available. Normally, commercial close and financial close
happen simultaneously or in quick succession. See figure 6A:1.
FIGURE 6A.1: Private Partner PPP Pathway
44

Note: RFP= Request for Proposal.
45

6.2 How the Private Party Targets Markets and Selects PPP
Projects
There are many private parties involved in a PPP project and each has its own
specific reasons for investing in such a project. Influencing factors include a
party’s investment appetite, together with its corporate strategy; the mandate it
has to invest in specific sectors/countries; and how expensive or costly it is to
bid for PPP projects in a particular country.
The level of PPP activity in a market will be influential too. A large number of
existing PPP participants may reveal there is too much competition for a private
party to deliver a winning bid. Too few PPP participants may indicate a lack of
market liquidity. However, on occasion, a private party may simply form a view
that a specific PPP project represents a good business opportunity and this will
mean that it decides to become involved.
Each private party will have a different perspective as to what is the right
investment for it. Some will be looking for a long-term investment, and a PPP
project with a long 20–30 year term will be highly attractive. Others, such as the
construction contractor may prefer to invest for the short-term only, managing
the preliminary PPP project stages (design and construction) and exiting after
the PPP project asset has been constructed. Some private parties will be O&M
providers, and for these parties the prospect of a PPP project providing
significant long-term operating revenues over a 20–30 year term is attractive.
Normally, at the time a private party takes a decision to invest in a PPP project,
it will also have an idea of how long it will remain committed to the PPP project
and when it will exit.
6.2.1 Targeting Markets
The most attractive markets for a private party are ones that offer predictable
and strong growth potential with high or adequate levels of return, and those
that provide business-friendly environments within which to work. The
attractiveness of any market, however, may be diminished by the risks present
in it. As seen later in this section, a private party needs to ensure that any
country or market risk, such as political risk or currency fluctuation risk, can be
controlled. For example, a change in a country’s government might herald in
the introduction of a new political policy that prohibits PPP projects and results
in current projects being terminated.
A private party goes through a structured process to identify where in the world
and in what sector it wants to invest. Identifying the best investment
opportunities involves several considerations.
46

• Appropriate target regions/countries (balancing long-term prospects
versus political, financial, or regulatory risks16);
• The class of infrastructure assets in which to invest;
• The extent of secondary market activity which could provide options to
sell/exit the PPP project;
• The risk profile of PPP projects and the procuring authority’s
expectations regarding the degree of risk transfer to the private party;
• The acceptability of the environmental, social, and regulatory policies
applying to the PPP project; and
• The role the PPP private party wants to play when managing the PPP
project asset: passive or active.
Such considerations also involve an assessment of how these factors are

viewed relative to a private party’s capabilities and experience.
Based on the conclusions reached after consideration of these factors, a private

party will decide on those countries and assets in which it will invest. The
decision made will be formalized through the creation of a short list/focus list of
target countries, assets, and specific projects (if known). Many private parties
refer to this short list as their projects pipeline. See figure 6A.2.
FIGURE 6A.2: Origination of Project Pipeline and Focus List.
Note: ESG= Environmental, Social and Governance .
16 For further reading on the effect of regulation, see Sirtaine, Pinglo, Guasch, Foster, How Profitable are
Infrastructure Concessions in Latin America? Empirical Evidence and Regulatory Implications, 2005.
47

6.2.2 Project Selection – Screening the PPP Project
Once a decision has been made to target a particular market, as identified in

the projects pipeline, it will then be necessary for a private party to make a
decision about a specific PPP project, and particularly, whether it constitutes a
good business opportunity.
The projects pipeline will be reviewed and updated regularly by the private
party’s business development and investment teams to check on how it is being
implemented. There may be a number of PPP projects that the private party is
provisionally interested in pursuing. However, its decision to go ahead with a
specific project is taken after it has received and considered a large amount of
information.
A key stage in the private party’s PPP project selection process is the point at
which a procuring authority announces its PPP project to the market. Such an
announcement may be through formal channels (such as an official
announcement in the Official Journal of the European Union), or it may be made
informally through direct approaches to interested parties or by advertising in
newspapers, trade journals, or on the procuring authority’s website.
Much more information about the PPP project will normally become available
when the PPP project is announced. The additional information that is made
available will assist a private party in carrying out its PPP project screening.
Screening the PPP project is another key stage in the private party’s selection
process; the information a procuring authority makes available will be highly
influential in helping a private party to conduct its PPP project screening.
It is good practice for a procuring authority to ensure that the information

provided is as robust as possible. Sometimes, however, the information
provided is less than expected. In this situation, a private party will rely on its
experience of carrying out similar PPP projects/transactions and on business
intelligence to assist it in with PPP project screening.
The PPP project screening involves consideration of a significant amount of

information relating to a PPP project, including a review of the PPP project’s
general commercial, technical, and financial requirements, together with an
analysis of the PPP project’s risks. The information will be used to help a
private party assess the PPP project’s commercial viability. See figure 6A.3.
FIGURE 6A.3: Project Evaluation Memo (PEM) and Preliminary Due Diligence
Risk Check
48

Note: GDP= gross domestic product; VfM= Value for Money.
49

Using the PPP project screening information, a private party will make its initial
decision as to whether to proceed with the PPP project (that is, to proceed with
a full assessment of the PPP project and the preparation of a bid). If the result
of the PPP project screening is satisfactory, then the private party may decide
to progress with the PPP project, particularly if it perceives that it has a good
chance of a successful bid.
Alternatively, even after completing a PPP project screening, it may consider

that it needs to conduct further analysis and obtain more information. Obtaining
additional information may help a private party to decide to proceed with the
PPP proposal, but it may also lead to a negative decision and the PPP project
being rejected by the private party.
A private party needs to be mindful of the costs associated with bidding for a
PPP project; this assessment is a key element of the PPP project screening.
The costs of bidding need to be proportionate to the financial/investment
advantage that the PPP project will deliver to the private party. The PPP project
screening will therefore include an assessment of bid costs: obtaining project
information from the procuring authority; attending meetings in an overseas
jurisdiction; instructing local advisers; and using personnel to prepare the bid.
Additional factors to consider are the preparedness of the procuring authority

to conduct the PPP project procurement efficiently, and its previous track record
in concluding projects quickly. A procuring authority with experience of
conducting efficient and quick procurements will give a private party some
confidence that its bidding costs will not escalate unexpectedly throughout the
procurement process.
The private party will also consider the cost of any physical due diligence it is
required to do before submitting its bid. For example, there may be a
requirement to carry out a geo-technical survey. If this is expensive to do, then
it may act as a barrier to entry; a private party may not want to incur the cost of
an expensive survey with no guarantee that its bid for a PPP project will be
accepted. As such, when a procuring authority is considering its tender
requirements, it is useful for it to consider the costs of meeting these
requirements and how such costs may influence whether a private party bids
or does not bid on a PPP project.
Assuming that the PPP project screening is positive, the private party will begin
its search for partners and advisors to work with it. When the private party has
found complementary partners, it will form a bidding consortium with them (see
section 6.4). At this stage, each of the key private party partners in the
consortium will normally be referred to as sponsors.
50

In summary, the decision to become involved in a PPP project depends on the
following factors outlined in box 6A.1.
51

BOX 6A.1: Factors Considered when Pursuing PPP Markets and
Opportunities
Factors to select countries or markets
• Region/Country
• Political and legal risks.
• Investment grade/credit rating.
• Macroeconomic forecasts: gross domestic product (GDP),
inflation, currency.
• Foreign investment rules.
• Investment appetite.
• Long-term stability.
• Market/Sector
• Policy and regulations: supply, price, and tax.
• Competition and procurement rules.
• Market size and expected growth: existing and future demand.
• Competitors and partners.
• Procuring authority preparedness and track record.
• PPP program: robustness/attractiveness and tender rules
(stipend, duration, and so on).
Factors to select opportunities

• Investment size.
• Whether the qualification criteria can be satisfied.
• Bankability.
• Return on investment and potential for profit throughout the
asset’s life cycle (equity Internal Rate of Return (IRR)).
• Key contractual/transactional features: project risk profile and
operational period.
• Complexity: consents, technical risks (during construction and
operational periods), risk of delays, cost overruns, and
environmental risks (including climate change).
• Benchmarks: existing historical data and (variety of) projects.
• Existing forecasts (supply and demand).
• Complementarity with sponsor’s/investor’s existing portfolio.
• Perceived chance of success relative to the cost of bidding .
6.3 Bid Preparation and the Decision to Submit a Response to

the RFP
Following on from a successful PPP project screening, and once partnerships
have been formed between like-minded organizations in the consortium (see
section 6.4), the two main activities that the consortium will carry out are
52

preparing the response to the procuring authority’s RFP and making the
investment decision about whether to submit a consortium response to it.
Section 6.7 below sets out all the key activities that need to be completed by
the consortium in order for a RFP response to be completed and submitted.
Making the investment decision about whether to submit a RFP requires each
individual member of the consortium (each sponsor, see section 6.4.1), and the
consortium as a whole to acquire a deeper understanding of the main risks
associated with the PPP project. Specifically, there needs to be consideration
of how such risks could be allocated and managed by consortium members if
they decide to submit a RFP17. Accordingly, each consortium member will carry
out a more in-depth assessment of the PPP project risks because: (i) each
sponsor will need to assess whether its organization should make a decision to
proceed with the PPP project; and (ii) all sponsors, acting together as the
consortium, will need to take a collective consortium decision about whether to
proceed with responding to the RFP.
Both the sponsors and the consortium will require a full analysis of the
commercial risks associated with the procuring authority’s PPP project,
including an appraisal of any threats to the forecasted project revenues.
Additionally, consideration will be given to any regional or country risks.
Local intelligence about PPP project specific issues, such as the stability of the
local environment where the PPP project will be implemented and the
preparedness of the procuring authority to run its PPP project tender, will also
be important to know. These factors will influence the sponsors’ and the
consortium’s decisions. Politically unstable environments (for example, where
are elections due) create a risk that a new government might not support the
procuring authority in its PPP project proposal. This will cause concern.
Similarly, if the procuring authority lacks sufficient personnel or is not
adequately prepared and organized to run its PPP project tender, then this too
will be of concern to sponsors and the consortium.
Concern arises because if any of the risks materialize, the successful operation
of the procuring authority’s PPP project tender could be jeopardized at any
stage and, specifically, before the final award of the PPP project. From the
consortium’s and each individual sponsor’s perspective, neither will want to
expend its time, money, and energy bidding for the PPP project if there is a
17 See McKinsey & Company, A Risk-Management Approach to a Successful Infrastructure Project.

Initiation, Financing and Execution (2013) for details on how to establish an integrated enterprise-risk-
management (ERM) approach.
53

significant risk that it might be aborted midway through its procurement. It is
therefore good practice for the procuring authority to provide evidence of
governmental support for its PPP project, and to give evidence to bidders that
it is suitably prepared to run the PPP project tender.
An additional area of concern for sponsors and the consortium is the PPP
project’s procurement timetable. Sponsors and the consortium will require an
assurance that the suggested procuring authority’s procurement timetable is
achievable. Project sponsors and the consortium will dislike taking part in a
bidding process that does not proceed according to a robust and appropriate
timetable. Frequent timetable changes will erode their confidence in the PPP
project unless there are objectively good reasons for changes, or the changes
are requested by a private party.
The sponsors and the consortium also frequently require an assurance

regarding the procuring authority’s preparedness18 to run its PPP project
tender, the quality of the PPP project’s contractual documents, and the support
the PPP project has from within government. Such assurances will provide
some comfort that the risk of a PPP project being aborted has been mitigated.
This analysis will normally be carried out using the sponsors’ in-house
resources, typically their business development team or their investment team.
When carrying out this exercise it is important that the sponsors have broad
experience in identifying and managing risks similar to those likely to emerge
in the PPP project. In this context, the sponsors’ previous experience will mean
that they will know what points/issues are of concern when carrying out the
analysis. In some instances, the sponsors might also hire external/independent
experts to help with this task.
On completion of its analysis, each sponsor will let its fellow sponsors know of
its decision to participate and continue its involvement in the bidding process.
These decisions will normally be discussed during regular consortium meetings
known as steering group meetings – see section 6.4.3. Further, the decision of
each sponsor will be taken into account when the consortium makes its decision
on whether to submit a RFP response. See figure 6A.4.
18There is evidence that lack of preparedness may facilitate opportunistic negotiations over aspects of
the PPP project. See Engel, Fischer and Galetovic, Public-Private Partnerships: When and How, 2000.
54

FIGURE 6A.4: Bid Preparation and the Decision to Submit a Response to the
RFP
Note: RFP= Request for Proposal.
55

6.4 Putting a Consortium Together
Following a successful PPP project screening, partnerships will be forged
between like-minded organizations and a consortium will be formed with a view
to responding to the procuring authority’s RFP.
Implementing the PPP project will require the implementation of material

construction, operations, and maintenance activities. This means that the
consortium will normally be made up of sponsors representing these interests.
In practice, it is normal for the consortium to include a construction contractor,
a service provider, an operations and maintenance provider, and an identified
lender.
Collaborative working in a consortium has many advantages. It facilitates the

development of innovative project solutions, including how commercial risks
should be managed. It may also help combine different sources of project
funding and complementary business aims. It will ensure too that bidding costs
are shared among the consortium members. Its value comes from the proper
combination of the members’ strengths, capabilities, and resources.
Forming a consortium may also be a prerequisite to submitting a RFP because

many RFPs require a strength and depth of project experience that can only be
provided by multiple parties ‘pooling’ their experience as part of a bidding
consortium.
Working together in a consortium needs to be carefully managed. Significant

efforts must be focused on finding the best partners for the PPP project. In
some cases, due diligence is carried out by one partner on another in order to
obtain assurance about its technical and financial capabilities, experience, and
reputation. The principles to take into account for a productive and effective
partnering, and consequently, for ensuring a successful consortium are as
follows.
• Early involvement of key sponsors across institutions;

• Commitment of each of the sponsor’s senior management;
• Common goals between sponsors;
• Clear understanding of responsibilities, risks, and rewards between the
consortium’s members and key suppliers;
• Identification of key individuals/teams who will work together;
• Selection of bidding partners based on value (not price);
• Common cultural values and processes across consortium members
and key suppliers;
• Ideally, practical experience among consortium members of having
worked together and of having built successful joint bidding/working
teams;
56

• Previous PPP experience and track record of consortium members; and
• The relationship a proposed partner has with the procuring authority.
6.4.1 Consortium Members
The consortium that responds to the procuring authority’s RFP will typically
include the following key private partners, all of whom may be required to bid
together on an exclusive basis.
• The sponsor is the party (or parties) who will assume a leading role in
the PPP project during the investment life cycle. However, it should be
noted that some project sponsors will not want to have an active role, so
they will just be equity investors.
Sponsors create the consortium for the sole purpose of bidding for the
PPP project. As will be seen below, it is the consortium that will
eventually become the SPV implementing the PPP project. The
sponsors (or their parent companies) often have to provide guarantees
or enter into management or service agreements to cover certain
liabilities or risks.
• The construction contractor (or construction team) is the party (or

parties) that will be responsible for designing, building, and
commissioning the PPP project asset during the Construction Phase. It
includes designers, technical specialists, civil/Monitoring and Evaluation
(M&E) contractors, and all sorts of construction advisors and suppliers.
In some cases the construction contractor may also be a sponsor.
During the PPP project tender stage, the contractor will provide the main
technical and quality outputs of the proposal as well as the
construction/lump sum price (Capex). When awarded the PPP project,
the construction partners may incorporate an ad hoc vehicle called a
Cooperative Joint Venture (CJV) or Engineering, Procurement and
Construction Consortium (EPCC).
Unlike the approach taken by other members of the consortium, in many

projects it has been the practice for the construction contractor to exit
the consortium once the PPP project asset is built and fully operational.
• The operations and maintenance contractor (or operations and

maintenance team) will be the party (or parties) responsible for operating
and maintaining the PPP project asset over its life cycle. At the bidding
stage of the PPP project, the O&M team will provide the technical and
quality outputs related to O&M, as well as the price regarding operational
57

expenditure and capital/life-cycle expenditure (Opex, operational
expenditure and life-cycle costs). When awarded the PPP project, the
O&M partners may incorporate an ad hoc vehicle called an Operating
Company (OpCo). Like the construction contractor, in some cases the
operations and maintenance contractor may also be a sponsor.
In addition, and depending on the specific bidding requirements determined by

the procuring authority, the lender (or bank), as the party (or parties)
responsible for arranging debt19, may be a consortium party. However, unlike
the other consortium members, it will not be an equity participant. The lender
might be a commercial bank, an institutional lender, a development bank, or an
infrastructure fund.
It should be noted that the role and status of the lender is different to that
assumed by the other consortium members. If fully committed finance is
required at the RFP tender submission, then the lender will be a “tied-in”
member of the consortium. It will normally provide the PPP project funding
according to the terms of the RFP tender submission, subject to all parties
agreeing to certain changes to the funding solution as required.
If, however, fully committed finance is not required at the RFP tender
submission stage, then the lender will be more loosely associated with the
consortium. It will provide indicative financing terms to the consortium and it will
demonstrate its intention to support the consortium. However, it will not be until
much later on in the procurement, perhaps after commercial close, that it will
confirm its funding terms and so become a full member of the consortium by
acting as the consortium’s lender.
The consortium may also include members of the contractor’s and operator’s
supply chain, such as key sub-contractors and facilities management providers
(FM providers). This might happen if supply chain members are providing
specialist support and there is a need to “tie-in” their involvement with the
consortium, thus avoiding them working with a competitor. See figure 6A.5.
FIGURE 6A.5: Consortium Members and Key Relationships
19 The debt arranger will usually provide a part of the loan funds. Sometimes it may be committed to
provide the whole amount (underwriting) so as to allocate part of the funds among other banks
(syndication).
58

Note: Co= company; EPCC= Engineering, Procurement and Construction Consortium;
FC=Financial close FM= facilities management; OpCo= Operating Company; SPV= Special
Purpose Vehicle.
6.4.2 Consortium Agreements
Once the consortium is formed, the next requirement is for the sponsors to put
suitable bidding arrangements in place. These will normally take the form of a
Letter of Intent or Memorandum of Understanding that will be entered into by
the sponsors, which will set out their intention to bid together, normally on an
exclusive basis. These agreements may not be binding. However, a more
formal and binding agreement, known as a “consortium agreement”, may be
agreed to by the sponsors.
The consortium agreement and the other associated agreements referred to

above will set out how the consortium will operate, together with the rights and
responsibilities of its members. Each member’s responsibility for carrying out
and meeting/sharing the costs of bid development will be documented, as well
as how parties will take decisions and work collaboratively. Specifically, the
procedures and decision-making mechanisms to ensure proper governance of
59

the consortium will be documented (for example, the creation and use of the
steering committee for significant decisions – see section 6.4.3). See figure
6A.6.
The importance of the Consortium Agreement should not be underestimated.

This agreement will form the basis of the shareholder’s agreement. It will
influence the private party’s project structure and governance, and the
allocation and responsibility for the management of project risks between the
consortium parties. It is customary too that the sponsors will enter into a
confidentiality agreement, meaning that they will agree to keep each other’s
commercial information confidential at all times.
FIGURE 6A.6: Sequence for Bidding Agreements
60

There is no standard practice with regard to partnering. However, there are
some methodologies (that is, “BS 11000 Collaborative Business
Relationships”) that can be used to help develop and manage relationships
between companies in such a way as to maximize efficiency.
6.4.3 Governance Procedure for Decisions and Approvals Relating to the

Bid
Adopting good governance practices that embody accountable and transparent

decision-making will help reinforce each consortium member’s responsibility to
the other. The practices should help eliminate ambiguous project risk sharing
and ensure that proper procedures are put in place to resolve disagreements
between members.
During the bidding process it will, therefore, be necessary to put into practice
effective governance mechanisms to determine how best to run the RFP
response preparation and to ensure that all members of the consortium are fully
accountable. The most common way of doing so is by establishing a steering
committee.
The steering committee will support the bid manager (see section 6.7 for a list
of the bid manager’s responsibilities) in its role of ensuring that the preparation
and submission of the RFP response is carried out properly and always meets
deadlines. It will also support the bid management team, including those
individuals who are responsible for taking key decisions about the content and
progress of the RFP response. In practice, this will mean that the bid
manager/management team will provide regular reports to the steering
committee on arising PPP project issues. The steering committee will consider
these and make decisions on the basis of the received reports.
The cornerstones of good project governance are the steering committee, the
sponsors, and the bid manager and team. See figure 6A.7.
FIGURE 6A.7: Consortium Governance over the Tender Process
61

Note: Rep= representative.
Senior representatives from the sponsors comprise the steering committee

(SC).
• The SC follows a formal framework that defines its role in relation to the
bid management and the governing bodies of the sponsors/parent
companies;
• SC members must be mandated/authorized to take the necessary
decisions by their respective sponsors/parent companies;
• The SC defines and promotes the principles and objectives of the
bidding team;
• The SC agrees to the bid strategy after input from the sponsors;
• The sponsors appoint the SC members depending on their number of
shares;
• The number of SC members should be appropriate (no less than 4 and
no more than 10);
• A chairperson and a secretary should be appointed;
• The SC empowers and provides direction to the bid manager in order to
define acceptable risk profile/thresholds and maximize the bidding
team’s options; and
62

• The SC will approve the bid closure after obtaining approval from the
sponsors.
Steering committee meetings will normally take place on a regular basis. It

should be noted at this point that the steering committee, the bid manager and
the team are in charge of managing and organizing the bidding process from
the private party’s perspective. As explained later, there will always be a
working team structure (not included in the above exhibit) that will be in charge
of preparing the technical, legal, and financial solutions.
Prior to submitting the bid, each individual sponsor must obtain approval from
its internal investment committee. Since each sponsor normally has different
procedures and requirements (that is, different information may have to be
provided, there may be different dates fixed for internal committees meetings,
and so on), the bidding team must be prepared to provide project information
to each of the sponsors well in advance of the procuring authority’s tender
submission date.
Additionally, the consortium as a whole must obtain the approval of the steering
committee to submit its bid because the decision to submit a final RFP response
constitutes a formal decision to invest. Consequently, in order to submit a RFP
response, all members of the consortium must be fully aligned and agree on its
terms and conditions. If one sponsor cannot agree on an issue relating to the
RFP response, meaning that there is no general agreement among sponsors,
then it will be difficult for the consortium’s response to be submitted. In such a
situation, it will be the steering committee that will try to broker an agreement.
Once this is achieved, the RFP response can be submitted.
One of the most important governance challenges the steering committee faces
is the need to deal with and manage disputes among the sponsors. Some
sponsors might not be 100 percent aligned with each other, or they might be
unable to adopt a consistent approach to the PPP project risks. Both situations
would undermine the consortium’s ability to prepare a competitive bid and
deliver Value for Money. To deal with key decision-making and conflicts of
interest, it is normal to have in place the following procedures and mechanisms:
• A structured voting procedure identifying decisions to be adopted by

simple majority, qualified majority voting, unanimity voting, and reserved
matters;
• A deadlock mechanism and reference to independent experts;
• A dispute resolution procedure that may involve recourse to alternative
forms of dispute resolution, such as mediation or arbitration; and
• Recognized situations in which recourse to the senior management of
the parent companies is required.
63

As noted, typically the governance procedures and the mechanisms in place
during the bidding process will be incorporated into the shareholders’
agreement.
6.5 Bringing Advisers on Board

Specialized knowledge is required to ensure a winning bid, and the consortium
bidding for the procuring authority’s PPP project will be keen to put this in place
as soon as possible. Despite the fact that large sponsors have internal
resources that can be used to deal with the preparation of the consortium’s RFP
response, it is common practice to use external advisers as well. See diagram
6A.8 below that sets out how the consortium’s sponsors and staff work together
with external advisers.
External advisers will work alongside the consortium’s members to support and
assist them in their review and assessment of the procuring authority’s PPP
project, and in particular, the review and assessment of the documentation
issued by the procuring authority.
External advisers will provide specialist technical, legal, and financial advice,
as well as general support to enable timely preparation of tender documents
and deliverables. Some advisers, although not all, may provide additional bid
planning and management services.
External advisers to the consortium will provide advice to the consortium as a

whole. Each sponsor may also have its own independent adviser.
Making significant decisions for and on behalf of the consortium is, as a rule,
outside the advisers’ scope of work. However, the external advisers, in their
supporting role, will ordinarily act as the ‘agent’ of the consortium. External
advisers used by the consortium will attend meetings called by the procuring
authority, and they may respond in writing to questions raised. However, they
do so in consultation with and after taking advice from the bid manager and
ultimately the consortium members. As such, their role is to act as the conduit
through which the consortium’s views will be expressed.
External advisers do not determine what these views are. Indeed, that is the
sole function of the consortium. However, by virtue of the advice provided by
the advisers to the consortium, the advisers can rightly be said to have helped
shape and influenced the consortium’s decisions. Occasionally, the consortium
may receive conflicting advice from advisers, and in such situations the bid
manager or the SC will act as the final arbiter and determine the way forward.
64

The typical areas covered by the external advisers are legal, technical, and
financial.
FIGURE 6A.8: Bid Working Team: Areas of Responsibility and Main Activities.
65

Note: CapEx= capital expenditures; FC= financial Close; OpEx= operation expenditure; PIM=
Project Information Memorandum ; FM = Financial model; RFP= Request for Proposal.
The consortium will be aware that it is advisable to start using expert advisers,
whether in-house or external, as soon as possible — and certainly by the time
a decision has been taken by the consortium to go ahead with a PPP project.
If not appointed early, there is a risk that the best advisers will not be available
and might be advising competitors.
In some instances, and depending on the complexity of the PPP project, the
consortium may chose a large international multidisciplinary consultancy firm
to provide all (or the majority) of the required advisory services at once.
Normally, however, the consortium will appoint several specialized advisers for
particular tasks, such as advising on just technical or financial aspects of the
project.
Typically, the consortium will try to secure the best international external
advisers. The importance of using local advisers should not be underestimated,
and it is common for the international advisers to help select suitable local
advisers.
Working with leading regional/local advisers (likewise with local bidding

consortium partners) is essential and the consortium should expect to obtain
such advice. This practice will help ensure that the consortium gets a good
understanding of the local context of the PPP project, including project risks.
Having local advisers will also facilitate the development of relationships and
meaningful interaction with local stakeholders, policy makers, and local
communities because local advisers will be working in the same environment.
The consortium will be keen to develop these relationships.
The key considerations to take into account when the consortium appoints
advisers can be summarized as follows;
• Professional advice is about people and skills: the consortium will

therefore want to ensure that key individuals from the adviser community
are available for their PPP project;
• The length of time taken to appoint advisers can be considerable.
Consequently, the timing of their appointment must not jeopardize
compliance with the procurement timetable;
• Advisers should have the relevant experience, capacity, and resources
to deliver on time and quality work through the tender process. It would
be helpful if they had experience in working with the procuring authority;
• Advisers should provide an assurance that the advisory team initially
appointed will be the team that advises throughout the tender process;
66

• Advisers should have no conflicts of interest and should confirm this to
the consortium on a regular basis. Where an advisory organization has
multiple teams advising multiple bidding consortia, then they should put
in place information barriers (“Chinese walls”) so that there are no
breaches of commercial confidences;
• The consortium’s and the advisers’ working cultures must be fully
aligned; and
• Advisers’ Terms of Reference (ToRs) must be prepared and structured
accordingly in order to ensure Value for Money. These will set out the
scope of work that the advisers need to provide and the corresponding
fee structure. The ToRs must be drafted to ensure a strong alignment of
interests, and a clear definition of goals, deliverables, milestones and
incentives.
The appointment of the consortium’s advisers is normally undertaken with the
support of the sponsors. The sponsors will have experience of working with
certain advisers and will have a good understanding of what activities could
usefully come within the advisory scope, as well as the price that should be
charged for providing the advice.
However, although sponsors might have preferences when appointing an

adviser, the appointment will be a consortium’s decision, that is, a combined
decision of the consortium members. When appointing advisers, the
consortium will know how important it is to follow a structured procurement
process; this ensures the receipt of competitive proposals that give Value for
Money and which are transparent.
6.6 Determining the Corporate Structure of the Project Vehicle

and the Project Contracts
One of the most important issues the consortium has to address is structure.
Its members need to decide the most appropriate structure to adopt in order to
finance and implement the procuring authority’s PPP project successfully.
This PPP Guide assumes a project financing approach. As such, normally this
means the consortium will create a special purpose company, known as a
Special Purpose Vehicle, in order to implement the PPP project. The
consortium would not normally adopt an unincorporated joint venture or a
partnership type structure.
The financing of the PPP project through project financing means that the
sponsors will require protection from the PPP project risks. They will require a
limited recourse structure that involves the creation of a SPV. All or most of the
PPP project risks that are set out in the project agreement will be assumed by
67

the construction and O&M contractors. These contractors assume the PPP
project risks by means of the SPV ‘passing’ through the obligations it assumes
from the procuring authority under the project agreement into the construction
and O&M contracts.
Addressing structure, and taking a decision in relation to it, will be made in the
full knowledge that it is the consortium that will be reformed as the project
vehicle, and that the sponsors will become the shareholders in that project
vehicle.
The SPV will normally be established just before the project agreement is
entered into with the procuring authority, that is, at financial close. The
members of the consortium will normally be the shareholders in the SPV,
together with additional shareholders, such as investors.20 However, not all
consortium members will want to be SPV shareholders. For example, a
construction contractor sponsor may decide that it does not want to be a SPV
shareholder. Instead, it will decide to be part of the proposal as a nominee
contractor.21 It may wish to focus all its attention on construction activities,
rather than becoming involved in all aspects of the PPP project’s
implementation as members of the SPV are expected to do.
Each member of the consortium (with the potential exception of some nominee
contractors) will have to be committed to participate in the future SPV as a
shareholder, taking an equity stake in it. Shareholders will hold equity in the
proportions defined and agreed to in the shareholders’ agreement. The size of
an equity holding can vary from very small (pin-point equity) to large. Normally
it is the primary project sponsors who collectively hold the largest amounts of
equity.
The arrangements set out in the Consortium Agreement (see section 6.4.2) will
be reflected in the SPV’s constitution and in project contracts entered into by
the private party. The Consortium’s arrangements relating to working methods,
the rights and responsibilities of sponsors, and how PPP project risks and
rewards will be shared between sponsors will all be matters that are addressed
in the documents entered into to establish the SPV and the other PPP project
contracts.
20Occasionally the procuring authority may, because of legal requirements, be a member of the SPV. In
most cases, the procuring authority plays a nominal/minority shareholder role with a limited role in SPV
decision-making. The SPV’s constitution will reflect the arrangement.
21Noting that in some tender processes it may be requested that the party that provides the construction
or the O&M experience be part of the SPV as a shareholder with a minimum equity involvement.
68

The SPV’s incorporation documents will include the SPV’s “memorandum and
articles of association” and the shareholders’ agreement. See figure 6A.9.
Often, there will be a direct link between one of the SPV’s shareholders and the
construction and/or O&M contractors. Where there is such a link, there needs
to be careful management of the relationship because there is a potential
conflict of interest between the interests of the SPV shareholder and the linked
contractor. In practice, this might mean that one of the SPV’s shareholders may
be unable to agree with the remaining SPV shareholders to accept a term in
the project agreement on the basis that it knows its linked contractor will not be
able to meet the obligation.
FIGURE 6A.9: SPV Shareholders
Note: O&M= operation and maintenance; SPV= Special Purpose Vehicle.
The SPV will be set up with one purpose only — to design, finance, build, and
operate the project. The SPV is arguably the main player in the PPP project
because of the number of activities it undertakes.
The SPV enters into the project agreement, obtains funding from investors, and
contracts with the construction and O&M contractors. All these activities
69

illustrate the key role of the SPV. The consortium will be aware of its key role
during the bidding stage and when formed into the SPV. The effect of this is
that it places a significant responsibility on the consortium to ensure that the
PPP project is structured in a robust way that protects its interests.
In a small number of PPP projects, the procuring authority has been a member
of the SPV. This practice is not common, but when it happens there will be
differences in how the SPV is set up and operates; for example, the private
party may have a different type of shares and the process for dealing with
disputes may involve recourse to a governmental body for a decision.
6.7 Responding to the RFP and Submitting a Tender Response

The complexity of the procuring authority’s PPP project requires the consortium
to adopt a project management approach to ensure that all necessary experts
and skills are managed in an effective and timely manner. Upon signing the
Letter of Intent (LOI), Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), or Consortium
Agreement (CA), and certainly no later than receipt of the RFP, the consortium
will ensure that a bid manager is appointed. The bid manager will be
responsible for the following tasks:
• Managing the bid submission process on behalf of the consortium;

• Leading and coordinating the preparation of successive RFP responses,
if required;
• Leading and managing the completion of key tasks, such as due
diligence activities, and commercial and financial feasibility reviews;
• Defining the work program, key tasks, interfaces, critical paths, and
milestones that need to be completed to ensure the consortium’s RFP is
submitted on time;
• Identifying the necessary resources needed to complete the RFP
response, such as in-house resources, external advisers, logistics, and
so on;
• Preparing the RFP proposal’s budget: direct and indirect costs, and
contributions from sponsors;
• Drafting proposals for the project sponsors steering committee to
approve. These will be key decisions about the approach to take and
positions to adopt in the RFP response; and
• Dealing with the procuring authority’s representative or third parties as
and when required.
Typically during the initial stages of responding to the RFP, senior staff from
one of the sponsors will assume the bid manager’s function on a temporary
basis until a permanent appointment is put in place. Likewise, one of the
70

sponsors may provide personnel from its organization to work as part of the
bidding team preparing the RFP.
For large and complex PPP projects that have been identified through the
sponsors’ due diligence, and which are strategic targets for them, it is likely that
a bid manager will be put in place before a PPP project has been officially
launched. The role of this bid manager will be to monitor the development of
the target PPP project for two reasons: to identify when it might be launched
into the market, and to liaise with the procuring authority in order to build a good
working relationship early on.
Carrying out these activities will help sponsors and/or the consortium prepare
in advance for the large and complex PPP project. This will be sound
commercial practice, as time will be limited once the RFP is launched; any work
that can be done beforehand will be useful.
FIGURE 6A.10: Bidding Team Resources over the Tender Process
Note: PMO=Project Management Office; SoQ= Statement of Qualifications.
71

Once the RFP is released, the bid manager will assume full responsibility for
these duties and for the preparation and submission of the RFP response.
As described in figure 6A.10, when preparing the RFP response there are
generally three working teams: the legal, technical, and financial teams. Each
team will have a team leader and a supporting or working team to provide
assistance. In some cases, consortium members may have additional advisers
working for each of them. At the beginning of the RFP response preparation,
the working teams would normally be made up of internal personnel (the input
from external advisers is not very significant at this stage).
As noted, once there is certainty about the tender process and the RFP details,
then external resources and advisers are used. These external resources will
supplement the existing internal resources provided by the sponsors. Normally
when the bidding process is ongoing, there will be key milestones to be met
with their associated deliverables, such as the completion of feasibility studies
and assessments.
At times, especially when the RFP proposal preparation work becomes

significant, seconded personnel from (one or all) of the sponsors may join the
bidding team to assist in preparing final or crucial deliverables. However, this
practice will only work successfully if the seconded personnel have sufficient
time to devote to the preparation of the RFP proposal. Their complete
cooperation is needed so that they become fully active members of the different
teams working effectively alongside the external advisers.
From the sponsors’ perspective, using seconded staff will help to ensure
alignment with the sponsors’ corporate guidelines, although it is recognized that
the collective views of the consortium members will need to prevail.
In large and complex projects, a Project Management Office (PMO) may be

created in order to assist the bid manager. The PMO is normally in charge of
setting standards and targets (and ensuring that they are followed), as well as
the gathering and production of information for management review and
managing/monitoring the tender milestones and deliverables.
It is useful to highlight that responding to an RFP successfully and submitting a

tender response is about implementing sound project management techniques
in relation to the tender, such as the following:
• Organizing the tender development process: Defining objectives and

organizing the right people;
• Planning the timetable for the development and submission of the tender
response, including: identification, assignment, and timing of tasks;
72

• Managing the execution of the tender submission, that is,
motivating/focusing the bidding team, making decisions, allocating
scarce resources, and monitoring the process;
• Ensuring consistency and the integration of the complementary aspects
of the tender response; and
• Learning for future tenders.
Organizing and managing the resources required to submit a bid is a significant
exercise and is costly for the sponsors. A proportion of the cost is, therefore,
normally included in the final tender price under the heading of “management
costs”. Additionally, it may be possible for the procuring authority to meet some
of the costs, especially where the PPP project’s procurement has been
protracted.
6.7.1 The Technical Solution
Appropriate management of key technical risks and solutions is a major

challenge for sponsors. Getting the right technical solution is not, however, an
easy task. Construction is a multi-phase and highly complex industry in which
the different phases are carried out by different parties. Apart from inherent
technical challenges, there is always a high risk of loss of information, lack of
coordination, and poor quality of outcomes.
The technical solution will be designed by the technical team, helped by

external specialized consultants, such as engineering specialists who will work
under the direction of the technical team leader or a technical committee.
In order to arrive at the optimal technical solution, it is necessary to work toward

the best design, that is, a design that is functional, sustainable, efficient, and
that meets quality standards. Good design adds value. This can only be
achieved with the following factors.
• Proper definition of output requirements and quality standards from the

procuring authority;
• Having the best technical advisers on board;
• Clear definition of roles/responsibilities within the consortium as well as
the main interfaces; and
• Proper management of a fully integrated supply chain.
Taking into account the output nature of PPPs, good design should start at the
early stages of the tender process. The procuring authority does not normally
provide significantly detailed design, technical information, or even technical
information that is warranted. In practice, this means that as soon as the tender
requirements are well known, the private party must start from scratch in
73

obtaining its own technical information. Despite the fact that some information
might be provided by the procuring authority, it is crucial that each private party
obtains (directly or indirectly) its own information or set of studies.
In some cases, the procuring authority might provide full PPP project designs
or construction requirements. In these circumstances, the private party will not
normally assume any risk relating to the accuracy of the provided requirements
— unless there is an opportunity to review the final design and to propose
design variations and changes of standards.
The main aim of the design process is to define the PPP project scope of work,
identify suitable metrics, and assess the costs. The former includes the
assessment of RFP technical and quality requirements, the assignment of
objectives among the technical team (who is responsible for what), and the
development of the conceptual design. The latter includes defining a Design
and Construction (D&C) schedule, a Bill of Quantities (BoQs), Key Performance
Indicators (KPIs), technical specifications, and a budget/cost for construction
(Capex).
Typically, in a PPP project the technical solution will be developed incrementally

as the tender process progresses – see figure 6A.11 below. As such, the
procuring authority should allow sufficient time in its procurement timetable to
enable this to happen. Where the technical solution is heavily reliant on the use
of technology, such as the provision of computers in a school, then it will be
necessary to assess the proposed technology and upgrade it as the PPP
project develops. Only by doing this will the provision of up-to-date technology
be assured. The final and definitive technical solution will normally only be
developed once the PPP project is awarded. The sooner the final design is
ready (and formally approved by the procuring authority) the sooner the
construction will start.
FIGURE 6A.11: Design Process and Interfaces
74

Note: BoQ= Bill of Quantities; CapEx= capital expenditure; D&C= Design and Construction;
LCC= life-cycle costs; OpEx= operational expenditure; O&M= operation and maintenance.
Similarly, in relation to the Operations Phase, the starting position is the RFP’s
output-based and performance-based specifications. These will be taken into
account in the project’s technical requirements (O&M Manuals). The technical
team will produce the long-term O&M plans, as well as an estimate of the
operational costs (Opex) and life-cycle costs (LCC) for the PPP project over the
duration of the project agreement.
It is well known that higher specifications involve higher construction costs.

However, they also lower operational expenditure because maintenance
requirements may be less for a PPP project asset with higher specification, as
it will normally have a longer life cycle. Conversely, lower construction costs
usually result in higher operational costs or larger investments over the life of
the asset.
The tension between construction and operational costs means that each of the
construction and O&M contractors’ approach to costs may conflict. As such, it
will be incumbent on the SC to manage this issue and to agree on an approach.
It will be crucial however to ensure that whole-life costs are kept to a minimum
without compromising quality and outputs. In doing so, benchmarking, cost
targeting, and value engineering methodologies must be used.
As noted, the appointment of an experienced multidisciplinary technical team is

important. However, it should be emphasized that proper management,
75

straight-forward communication, and full integration of the supply chain is
imperative. Only by putting in place the right rules and procedures will it be
possible to save time and money — minimizing the chances for errors,
omissions, extra works, and/or litigation.
At the end of the technical process, there will be two main inputs: the technical
bid package and the assessments of costs associated with the PPP project
(costs adjusted to the risk assumed by each party). Subsequently, these
outputs will be taken into account to carry out the necessary financial analyses
and to build up the financial model/outputs. It is important to highlight that the
final (and binding) decisions with regard to Capex, Opex and LCC will be
adopted very close to, or just before, bidding submission. Therefore, the
sponsors, steering committee, and the bidding team must be prepared to make
fast decisions under very tight schedules.
The technical solution will drive the PPP project, and consequently it will form
a key part of the project agreement.
IMAGE 6A.12: Key Design and Construction (D&C) Contractual Drivers
Note: D&B= Design and Build; EPCC= Engineering, Procurement and Construction
Consortium; PCG=parent company guarantee.
6.7.2 The Financial Solution
The financial solution comprises the business case used by the private party to
approve its decisions to invest in the PPP project and to submit its bid. It will
set out the private party’s financial strategy and financial structure (the optimum
mix of debt and equity) for the PPP project.
76

The financial model22 is one of the tools used by the private party to help it make
a financial assessment of the PPP project, and to assist it in structuring its
project finance solution.
6.7.2.1 The Financial Model
The most important function carried out by the consortium’s financial team is to
develop its financial model. Normally, the financial team will delegate the
preparation of it to a financial adviser and this financial adviser will carry out its
development under the supervision of the bid manager and/or the financial
team leader if there is one. See box 6A.2. The financial model is necessary to
help the consortium prepare its bid, as well as provide the procuring authority
with a method of assessing the robustness of the consortium’s RFP response.
The financial model will be comprised of a number of separate cost elements

which will be combined to form the total price that the private party will require
in order to implement the PPP project. In practice, there will be, for example,
amounts in the financial model that set out PPP project costs (such as
construction, O&M, and financing costs). All of these costs need to be added
together in order to calculate the total price offered by the consortium.
In terms of assisting the consortium to prepare its bid, the construction of the
financial model serves a number of purposes.
First, it assists in the financial analysis of the PPP project, including the
payment mechanism, and it is used to assess the appropriateness of the PPP
project as an investment opportunity for the consortium. It does this by
identifying the relative project risk-return. A favorable assessment will help
inform the decision to submit or not submit an RFP response. Most importantly,
it will help determine the price and costs of the elements that make up the
private party’s RFP proposal.
For example, the financial team, or the financial advisers if instructed by the
financial team leader, will review the PPP project’s payment mechanism and
assess predicted project revenues. For “government-pays” projects, the SPV
will have made an assumption about the annual unitary charge it needs to
receive from the procuring authority in order to deliver the PPP project.
Payment to the SPV will, however, be dependent on the delivery of an expected
service at an expected level. A failure to deliver this will result in a deduction
22 In practice, the private party may use two financial models: one which is provided to the procuring
authority to support the calculation of its tender costs, and another which contains the ‘true’ cost of the
private party’s bid and which is for internal use only.
77

made against the monthly unitary charge paid by the procuring authority. For
instance, in a hospital PPP project, if one of its wards is unclean then it will be
deemed to be unavailable and an unavailability deduction will be made.
The financial team will therefore be keen to test how aggressive the proposed
PPP project payment mechanism is. This allows them to estimate the likelihood
of deductions and the associated effect on the PPP project’s anticipated
revenues. It will do this by running scenarios and sensitivities using the financial
model.
Similarly, under “user-pays” projects where the SPV receives revenue from the
user of the PPP asset, for example road users paying tolls, the consortium’s
financial team will be involved in forecasting both use and revenues. These
forecasts will be used to assess if the anticipated use made of the PPP asset,
plus any constraints on toll levels imposed by the procuring authority, will
generate sufficient PPP project revenues. Again the financial model will be used
to test the scenarios and help inform decisions about the suitability of the PPP
project.
Second, the financial model is used as an aid to help the consortium assess
certain parts of its RFP response, as well as helping it to assess the overall
value and appropriateness of its proposal. For example, the financial model will
be used to help determine the fixed construction and O&M prices which are key
parts of the overall proposal submitted to the procuring authority. It does this by
enabling the consortium to test a variety of prices until it gets to an optimal total
price for the PPP project.
Third, the financial model is used to test financial structures and so help
determine the type of PPP project financing to be used by the consortium. For
example, the funders will specify a set range of sensitivities they want the
financial advisers to assess using the financial model. The financial model will
therefore run test scenarios, such as assuming a debt- or bond-financed
project.
It will also be able to test the impact of different debt terms or strategies (for
example, using a short-term or mini-term loan which is then refinanced after
construction) on the equity IRR. The benefit of being able to test different
scenarios is that it will reveal the advantages and disadvantages of each
approach. It will also help in the assessment of the degree of risk attached to
the proposed funding. Thus, the financial model will help the consortium decide
which funding solution to adopt.
The financial model will also be used to test proposals and counter proposals
that are considered during the procurement negotiations. The ability to run
78

sensitivities will also help with the consortium’s negotiations with potential
funders. The consortium will be able to input the funder’s requirements into the
financial model to see what effect such requirements will have on its anticipated
project return. Where the effects are less favorable to the consortium, it will be
able to highlight this to a prospective lender by using the financial model. As
such, the financial model becomes a tool used by the consortium to help it
negotiate funding terms with its funders.
The financial model is a key component of a project and reflects the financial
basis upon which the PPP project has been agreed. It will be submitted to the
procuring authority as part of the response to the RFP. It provides a robust
assessment of the consortium’s costs and revenues inherent in its RFP
response. It is the information in the financial model that determines the amount
of the annual/ monthly payment that the SPV will need to receive in order to
meet all its cost liabilities. As a consequence, it will be fundamental for the
procuring authority’s financial advisers to fully understand the information
contained in it.
The consortium’s financial model is a computer model showing a detailed

analysis of the anticipated income and expenditure of the PPP project, its cash
flow and balance sheet projections, together with any reserves and
contingencies required. It will also include details of the assumptions
underpinning the monies set out in the financial model.
The financial model is a necessary component of the consortium’s RFP

response documentation. It will enable the procuring authority to carry out a
robust assessment of the consortium’s costs and revenues. It also enables the
procuring authority to compare how each private party bidding for the PPP
project has structured its financing, as well as the financing assumptions the
private party has made (for example, regarding interest rates or inflation).
When each private party’s financial models are reviewed as part of the
competitive bidding process, it will reveal the genuine differences between
parties. It will also reveal how sensitive the RFP responses are to external
factors, such as interest rate changes. In order to ensure consistency when
making comparisons between parties’ bids, the procuring authority will make
certain assumptions regarding, for example, rates of interest and exchange
rates such that it will assume the rates are the same for each party’s bid.
While the financial model is produced by the consortium as part of its response
to the RFP, it will continue to be adjusted to reflect the financial consequences
of any PPP project changes agreed with the procuring authority during the
bidding process and throughout the term of the PPP project.
79

BOX 6A.2: Financial Advisers’ Activities
• Developing the financial model.
• Identifying financing structures.
• Identifying sources of finance, including grants.
• Negotiating with funders.
• Advising on the Project Information Memorandum (PIM) and other
financial terms, such as ratios and financial covenants.
• Fundraising and managing the funding competition.
• Project risk assessment.
• Reviewing the payment mechanism.
6.7.2.2 Funders to the PPP Project and the Types of Funds they Provide
The financial structure of a PPP project, as in any project financing, requires
the provision of debt and equity. Debt and equity can be provided by a number
of entities, and they are normally provided at the point where the consortium
changes its status and incorporates into the SPV. It should be noted too that
the capital markets can be used to raise debt funding.
The sponsors will inject equity into the PPP project by becoming shareholders
in the SPV. They will have an equity stake in the SPV. Additionally, they may
provide subordinated debt, especially if this ensures a favorable treatment for
taxation purposes. International and domestic commercial banks will be the
usual funders to the PPP project unless a project bond structure is developed
(see below). Multilateral institutions such as the World Bank, through the
International Finance Company (IFC), the European Investment Bank (EIB),
the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the African Development Bank (AfDB),
and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) may also
provide a source of project finance. Export credit agencies can also be a
funding source.
Other potential debt providers are debt funds, sovereign wealth funds, and
pension funds. Such providers may provide equity.23 The optimal mix of funding
sources will be dependent on their availability for a particular PPP project in a
23 In some countries, the equity providers may be allowed to transfer their shares early on (for example,
before the construction works start). In such a case, it is not uncommon for sponsors to pre-agree with an
investor on the disposal and transfer of a percentage of their equity shares to the investor. This means
that the equity investor would become an equity participant in the PPP project at the same time as financial
close. In other countries, however, all equity investors will have to be part of the bidding consortium from
the beginning in order to be allowed to invest in equity. If this is not the case, then the investor will only
be able to become an equity investor after the construction works are completed.
80

specific market, as well as the overall cost of funding for the PPP project. See
box 6A.3.
BOX 6A.3: Examples of Entities that may Act as Project Funders

• Banks – domestic and international.
• Project sponsors.
• Infrastructure funds.
• Multilateral institutions.
• Sovereign wealth funds.
• Pension funds.
The main features of the debt and equity elements of a PPP project’s financial
structure are set out below.
Debt
Most PPP projects receive debt financing from banks. Debt financing is
normally the cheapest form of project finance. Bank financing normally results
in a bank lending, for example, 70–90 percent of the monies required to fund
the PPP project, with the balance of 10–30 percent coming from equity
providers. The amount of debt provided to a PPP project as a percentage of its
total funding requirement is known as its gearing. In respect of the above
examples the gearing is 90–70 percent, and the split of debt and equity sources
of finance is represented by the ratio 90:10/80:20/70:30 respectively. It should
be noted that a PPP project’s gearing depends on the risks attached to the
specific PPP project, with certain project sectors receiving a lower proportion of
the debt than others. See figure 6A.13.
FIGURE 6A.13: Capital Structures: Equity/Debt
81

The cost or price of debt is normally the underlying cost of funds to the funder
plus its margin and the associated fees. The margin is the additional funder’s
costs to cover the risk of the SPV’s loan default and the costs of putting in place
the loan itself.
The underlying cost of funds is determined on the basis of floating/fluctuating

interest rates. The cost of lending money over 20–30 years, the typical length
of a PPP project, will not remain constant. However, the PPP project cash flows
will generally be constant. This means that there is a mismatch between the
constant/steady state revenues that the SPV receives under the PPP project
— and the ever changing interest rates that apply to the underlying costs of
funds borrowed.
This issue is addressed by the SPV taking out a financial product to pay a fixed
amount of interest for the funds borrowed. This financial product is known as
an interest rate swap and it will be purchased at financial close.
Debt repayment
Debt is repaid over the lifetime of a PPP project. The debt payment profile will
be set out in the funding agreements and will be determined at financial close.
Normally, debt will be fully paid off before the PPP project term ends, leaving a
period of time when all monies coming into the PPP project will be paid out to
the equity providers.
82

Funding contingencies
It is not unusual, although it is undesirable, for a PPP project to face unforeseen
financial liabilities such as cost overruns. When this happens, funds need to be
found to make payment. The monies required are known as contingency
funding. The amount of contingency funding will be set out in the financial
model.
Currency for borrowing

Although there is no correct practice, borrowed funds will normally be in the
local currency used to make payment to the SPV. Should the local currency be
particularly volatile, then the procuring authority may find that the SPV will
charge a higher cost of funding because of the increased risk of the PPP project
revenues being devalued.
The currency of capital outlays and the availability of funds from local markets
will also affect the cost of funding. The procuring authority, in a “government-
pays” project, may therefore find it beneficial to make payment in US dollars or
pounds sterling. These currencies are stable and payment in them will be
attractive to the SPV because it will help mitigate its currency risk.
Equity
Different types of investors can provide equity. These include infrastructure
funds, third party investors, and construction and O&M companies. Equity is
injected through the acquisition of share capital by individual shareholders.
When equity is provided, the equity provider will acquire shares in the SPV and
be classified as a shareholder.
Payment of equity, known as a dividend, normally occurs after the PPP project’s
debt (including subordinated debt24) has been paid, so it happens late in a PPP
project’s term. This means that it is most at risk. Should there be insufficient
PPP project revenues generated because of poor performance of a PPP
project, then it may not get paid out. As it is most at risk, and its payment is
deferred, the equity providers will expect a much higher return for the monies
they have lent. It is more expensive than debt.
Use of the capital markets

Bond financing of PPP projects is not the prevailing source of finance. However,
it provides an alternative funding instrument that the SPV can access through
the capital markets. Specifically, it provides long-term finance for the PPP
24 The benefit of subordinated debt is that it can be repaid throughout the term of the project at an agreed
fixed rate of interest and provides the sponsors an additional return.
83

project which can complement the debt provided by the funders. However,
bonds are less flexible than bank debt.
The process of carrying out a bond issue varies from country to country. If a
bond is going to be issued, then it will be necessary to obtain local financial and
legal advice so that a robust commercial, financial, and legal due diligence can
be carried out on the project and the procurement process.
For any bond issue, it is a prerequisite that there be an appropriate risk

allocation between the PPP project parties. Additionally, each of the PPP
project parties must have a strong covenant that is supported by different types
of security. In practice, this means that the approach to these issues, as
evidenced above in the case of a debt financing, is broadly similar.
There are a number of stages that a bond issue goes through and these can
be summarized as follows.
• Pre-launch – deciding the type of bonds to issue, their value and terms;
• Road show – marketing the prospective bond launch so as to attract
investors who will buy the bonds; and
• Bond issue – issue of bonds to investors and the payment of funds.
Bond issues can take a short or a long period of time to put in place. It will
depend on the country where the bonds are being launched and the project
sector, as some sectors are more attractive than others.
6.7.3 The Legal Solution: Review and Drafting of Legal Documentation
The consortium’s legal team will be made up of internal and external legal
advisers. It will have a number of tasks to complete.
Some tasks will need to be completed as part of the PPP project screening
process. Activities required at this stage include carrying out an assessment of
the key legal requirements that are already established (for example, it may be
known early on that there is a requirement for the SPV to have the procuring
authority as a shareholder), and reviewing the legal impact of the allocation of
PPP project risks.
Other tasks will be completed as part of the bid preparation process. The legal
team will have to work with the consortium’s commercial, technical, and
financial teams to ensure that their different solutions that form part of the RFP
proposal can have legal effect. This means that there will need to be a review
and assessment of the legal issues arising out of the project agreement, and
the consortium will need to be advised of the conclusions.
84

The legal team will also have a role in considering the legal aspects of the
procuring authority’s funding requirements. For example, the procuring
authority may request that the PPP project is bond financed, and in this situation
the legal team would advise on the financial, regulatory, and legal compliance
requirements.
It may be possible to amend the project agreement (if this is permissible it will
be stated on the PPP project tender documentation), and if so then this is a
task that the legal team will carry out at this stage.
The legal team may also be required to carry out legal due diligence to assess
the legal powers of the procuring authority to carry out the PPP project
procurement. It may also carry out due diligence on the legal and regulatory
framework of the PPP project.
As part of the bid preparation process, the legal team will need to put together
the package of legal documents required for the RFP response. There are
different practices worldwide. Some countries require that all the key PPP
project contracts are drafted, agreed, and submitted as part of the legal
package. This would include the construction and O&M contracts, the
agreements that create the SPV, and in some cases the funding documents.
Other countries do not require such a detailed response and accept heads of
terms (a summary of the key terms to be included in the contracts – see below)
for each of the key contracts at the point when the RFP response is submitted.
When this happens, however, the legal team will be required to draft and agree
to all the key contracts at a later time during the period from the appointment of
the preferred bidder to financial close.
Some legal tasks will be ongoing ones and will be carried out throughout the
PPP project procurement. Such tasks include negotiating with the procuring
authority, the funders, and the consortium’s supply chain contractors.
In summary, the legal team will have the following key tasks.
1. To review the legal aspects of the RFP, including the project agreement,
to interact with the procuring authority and to prepare the package of
legal documents that form part of the consortium’s RFP response;
2. To prepare the agreements necessary to set up the SPV (its
constitutional documents); draft the heads of terms for the construction
and O&M contracts; and draft, negotiate, and finalize the construction
and O&M contracts; and
3. To review the funders’ finance documents and draft the associated legal
documents, to participate in the general commercial negotiations, and to
support the fundraising negotiations.
85

1. Reviewing the legal aspects of the RFP, interacting with the procuring
authority, and preparing the package of legal documents that are a
requirement of the RFP
The legal documents issued as part of the procuring authority’s RFP will include
the project agreement, the direct agreement, details of the required insurances,
and the bid bond and required security. On occasion, the procuring authority
may provide or specify the forms of security it requires to provide an assurance
that the SPV will deliver the PPP project as required. For example, the
procuring authority may require a Parent Company Guarantee from the
construction contractor that will guarantee the proper performance of the
construction works.
The consortium’s legal team will consider the legal documentation provided by
the procuring authority. The team will highlight the key obligations and
responsibilities the procuring authority requires the SPV to assume.
The legal team, together with the consortium’s advisers, will also advise on the
risk allocation inherent in the legal documentation and its acceptability. Using
this information, the consortium will be able to make an assessment of the
obligations and risks that can and cannot be accepted.
During the course of the PPP project procurement and/or during the bid
submission period, the consortium will, through its legal advisers, let the
procuring authority know its view of the terms of the legal documents. It will do
this in writing, at meetings, or through a combination of both throughout the
bidding process.
The key terms within the procuring authority’s provided documentation that the
legal advisers consider can be found in table 6A.1.
TABLE 6A.1: Key terms within the legal documents provided by the Authority
Project Agreement Authority Direct Insurance Bid Bond and

SPV’s obligations Agreement Required Security
and responsibilities Step-in rights insurances, Quantum of
Construction including bond
matters Construction All Bond duration
O&M issues Risks, Business On demand
Payment and Interruption, nature
financial matters Advance Loss of Scope of the
The effect of Profits, Third Party parent
changes in law Liability, and
86

Force majeure, general project- company
delay events and specific guarantee
relief events insurances.
Termination,
including event of
SPV or authority
default
Sub-contracting
arrangements
Dispute resolution
procedure
Note: O&M= operation and maintenance; SPV= special purpose vehicle.
87

The legal team will be responsible for checking that all the RFP requirements are met,
and that the consortium’s RFP response is compliant.
2. Preparing the agreements necessary to set up the SPV (its constitutional

documents); drafting the heads of terms for the construction and O&M
contracts; and drafting, negotiating, and finalizing the construction and O&M
contracts
The key legal agreements that need to be prepared are as follows.
• SPV constitutional documents

The consortium’s legal advisers will spend a significant amount of time establishing
the SPV, for which the following is required.
SPV formation checklist
• Identify the SPV’s name;

• Identify the SPV’s address;
• Specify the number, name, and address of directors;
• Specify the names and addresses of the shareholders;
• Determine the size of each shareholder’s share allocation, including the share
types and value;
• Enter into a memorandum of association, that is, an agreement to form the
SPV;
• Agree to the rules that govern how the SPV will operate (the articles of
association);
• Prepare a statement of capital; and
• Draft and agree on the shareholders’ agreement.
In most cases, the formation of the SPV does not require the involvement of the
procuring authority. There may, on rare occasions however, be a requirement for the
procuring authority to be a shareholder in the SPV. It will also be prudent for the
procuring authority to carry out checks in some key areas. For example, some
procuring authorities require the SPV to be incorporated in the country where the PPP
project will be carried out; and some also apply restrictions on the age and
qualifications of those who can be appointed as SPV directors.
88

• Shareholders’ agreement
One of the key tasks for the consortium’s legal team will be to draft the shareholders’
agreement. As noted, the shareholders will be the project sponsors. The shareholders’
agreement needs to address, among other things, the following key issues in table
6A.2.
TABLE 6A.2: Shareholders’ Agreement Requirements
SPV Board Representation Composition of the SPV board; number of

and Voting Issues directors and their voting rights; inclusion of
a chair of the SPV board (or not); format of
board meetings; decision-making and how
to deal with deadlock between directors and
disputes.
SPV Governance Regularity of meetings; approach to conflict
of interests.
Budgeting and Dividend Developing and implementing the SPV’s
Distribution Policy annual financial plan; implementing the
dividend distributions policy, and developing
and approving changes to it.
Selling Shares and Development of shareholders’ rights to
Shareholder Exit Process purchase shares before any other party has
the opportunity to purchase them (pre-
emption rights); the timing and the process
to be adopted for shareholder exit, and the
scope of the indemnities to be provided to
the remaining shareholders.
SPV’s Daily Activities and Identification of the work the SPV will carry
Management out; its method of working; and its
operational management structure.
• Heads of terms
The consortium’s legal team will initially assist in the preparation of heads of terms
(HOTs) for the construction and O&M contracts which are entered into between the
consortium and the construction and O&M contractors. Although not binding, the
HOTs will set out, in summary, the key commercial areas that the consortium and the
construction and O&M contractors expect to be included in their contracts. Specifically,
they will set out the degree of acceptance that can be given to the project agreement
obligations that will then need to be passed through to the contractors. The HOTs will
be developed throughout the bidding process, and will eventually form the basis of the
construction and O&M contracts that will also be prepared by the legal advisers.
89

• Construction and O&M contracts
The construction contract may be based on international standard forms, such as
those promoted by the International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC). If so,
then the consortium’s legal team will amend the standard form to ensure that it
contains a full pass through of the construction obligations contained in the project
agreement. It will also include additional requirements that the SPV will expect its
contractors to comply with (for example, the requirement to provide a performance
bond for completion of the construction work). These additional requirements will sit
alongside the typical contractual requirements found in such contracts, such as the
requirements for a fixed construction price, a fixed completion date, and the payment
of milestone payments on completion of fixed packages of construction works.
If a bespoke construction contract is used, such as a “design and build” (D&B), instead
of an international standard form, then the consortium’s legal advisers will draft it so
that it will mirror the form and content of the project agreement. It will also contain a
direct pass through of its obligations (see below). In addition, it will reflect the
commercial agreement between parties regarding price, lump sum payment,
milestones, and the construction completion process.
Unlike construction contracts, O&M contracts are not based on standard forms and so
will be bespoke in nature according to the procuring authority’s PPP project. In this
respect, the drafting of the O&M contract will be carried out in a similar way to the
drafting of a bespoke construction contract. The O&M contract will mirror the form and
content of the project agreement, and will contain a pass through of the project
agreement’s obligations to the O&M contractor. The O&M contract will contain
additional commercial terms, such as a yearly price with a formula for inflating it on a
yearly basis and life-cycle obligations.
The construction and O&M contracts written by the consortium’s legal team will contain
a number of key terms, as outlined in boxes 6A.4 and 6A.5.
90

BOX 6A.4: Key Sections in the Construction Contract
• Design and construction process.
• Commissioning.
• Role and responsibilities of the independent tester.
• Construction completion certification.
• Snagging matters
• Latent defects.
• Performance bonds.
• Parent company guarantees.
• Insurance.
BOX 6A.5: Key Sections in the O&M Contract
• Services scope and requirements and impact of non-compliance.
• Maintenance scope and requirements and impact of non-compliance.
• Monitoring of performance.
• Poor performance and its consequences.
• Termination of poorly performing operator.
• Staffing and employment rights and responsibilities
• Parent company guarantees.
• Insurance.
Pass through of obligations and risks

The consortium’s legal team will ensure that there is a direct pass through of the
project agreement obligations into the construction and O&M contracts. In practice,
this means that the consortium’s legal advisers will ensure that each of the
construction and O&M obligations contained in the project agreement are extracted
and used to form the basis of the construction and O&M contracts, respectively.
Typically, in terms of documentation this might look like the following example in box
6A.6.
91

BOX 6A.6: Pass through of PPP Project Obligations
Project agreement term – construction
“The SPV shall complete all the construction works necessary to provide
the PPP facility.”
Construction contract term

‘”The construction contractor shall construct the PPP facility for a fixed sum.”
Project agreement term – O&M

“The SPV shall provide the procuring authority with the O&M services.”
O&M contract term

“Following completion of the construction of the PPP facility, the O&M
contractor shall provide the O&M services to the SPV in accordance with
the terms of this O&M contract.”
The approach to the pass through of the project agreement’s risks is illustrated as
follows in table 6A.3.
TABLE 6A.3: Project Agreement Risks
Project Agreement Pass Through Treatment

Risk/Obligation
SPV responsible for cost overruns Risks of price and time to be borne by
and construction delay the construction contractor through the
construction contract requiring
construction works to be completed for
a pre-agreed fixed lump sum and by the
completion date prescribed in the
project agreement.
Performance and service deductions Poor performance deductions under the
project agreement recovered by the
SPV through the operation of the
construction and O&M contracts. These
provide for the contractors to
compensate the SPV and make
payment to it for poor performance.
Liability of contractors to the SPV will be
capped however, and shortfalls will
need to be met by insurance or SPV’s
reserves.
Construction defects Construction contractor liable to meet
the cost of remedying defects by
assuming liability under the construction
contract.
Life cycle The O&M contractor is liable under the
O&M contract to meet the cost of
ongoing maintenance and life cycle.
Receives regular payments from the
92

SPV managed life-cycle fund to carry
these out. Failure to carry out life cycle
and maintenance may result in monies
being withheld.
Termination and replacement of sub- Poorly performing sub-contractors can
contractors be terminated and replaced by the SPV.
The construction and O&M contracts
provide for the SPV to be compensated
if a replacement sub-contractor is
required.
Land acquisition/planning and other May be retained by the procuring
consents authority. Alternatively, may be retained
by the SPV or be the responsibility of the
construction contractor under the
construction contract. Where retained
by the procuring authority or the SPV,
the construction works will not normally
commence until the land and consents
are acquired.
Site and soil conditions Risk is passed to the construction
contractor under the construction
contract.
Environmental matters Risk is passed to the construction
contractor under the construction
contract, and to the O&M contractor
under the O&M contract.
Strikes and protester action Risk is passed to the construction and
O&M contractors under their contracts.
Change in Law Risk is retained by the procuring
authority where it is discriminatory or
project specific. Risk of general changes
of law is passed through to the
construction and O&M contractors
under their contracts.
The consortium’s legal team will also need to consider and advise on the interface
issues that exist between the contractors. An example of such an issue is delay.
Should the construction program be delayed, then the O&M period will normally be
reduced because of the effect of the fixed PPP project term that means the operational
period cannot be extended by the length of the construction delay. A shorter O&M
period means that there will be less revenue available for the O&M contractor. The
O&M contractor, as it is not responsible for the construction delay, will wish to ensure
that it receives compensation from the construction contractor to cover its loss.
However, the O&M contractor has no direct contractual right to sue the construction
contractor for this loss. There is therefore the need to create a direct contractual
relationship between the O&M contractor and the construction contractor. This is done
through an interface agreement. It is the interface agreement that creates the
93

contractual rights between the contractors, and it gives each a right to sue and be
compensated by the other, should this be required.
3. Reviewing the funders’ finance documents, drafting the associated legal

documents, participating in the general commercial project negotiations, and
supporting the fundraising negotiations
PPP projects necessitate the completion of a significant amount of funding

documentation. The consortium’s legal team will work closely with its financial team to
ensure that the funding agreements are negotiated robustly with the lending
institutions, and that they accurately reflect the agreement reached between the
parties. As with all of the contractual documents, the legal team will work with the
sponsors to ensure that the terms and conditions of the funding documents are
acceptable.
6.8 Fundraising
6.8.1 Negotiating with Banks
The consortium’s financial advisory team prepares the Project Information

Memorandum (PIM). The PIM sets out details of the PPP project, including the
anticipated key contracts and projected revenues. Assuming a financing competition,
a group of funders will be asked to compete against each other to fund the PPP project.
They will then submit their responses to the financial advisers. These will be assessed
and a winner picked. That winner will become the PPP project’s funder. This practice
is normally known as a funding competition.
The assumption made is that fully committed financing will not be required while the
consortium is bidding for the PPP project. Rather, it is assumed that fully-committed
financing will only be required once the consortium has been selected as the preferred
bidder for the PPP project. In this situation, it is normal for the detailed funding
arrangements to be put in place during the period between the appointment of
preferred bidder and the close of the PPP project. However, in such cases, during bid
preparation and before bid submission, the main terms of the project financing will
have to be negotiated and agreed, or at least defined as a detailed “term sheet” under
an indicative proposal. This is because the consortium needs to be confident that a
project funder is satisfied with its RFP proposal.
The consortium needs to know the basis on which a funder will provide support to the
PPP project. Ideally, this needs to be known prior to submission of the RFP response
because the cost of finance will drive the overall cost of that response. It will be
problematical if the consortium only gets its financing terms agreed after it has
94

submitted its RFP response because the funder may make it a condition of funding
that the terms of the consortium’s RFP have to change. However, if the RFP response
has already been accepted by the procuring authority, then changing the RFP
response will be difficult to achieve.
It should be noted that it is possible for the lender that has won the funding competition
to be a sole bank or a group of banks, known as a “club” (or “syndicate”). The
successful lender will enter into a mandate letter with the sponsors setting out the
terms of the loan; these terms will form the basis of the finance documentation that is
entered into at a later stage.
It will take a period of time to agree to the terms of the PPP project’s funding
documents25. The funder will need to be satisfied that its investment in the PPP project,
through the provision of funds, is suitably protected. The funder will want to ensure too
that the PPP project risk allocation will minimize any chance of project default
occurring.
6.8.2 Banks’ Approach to Risk
As well as ensuring that there has been a robust approach to risk allocation, the
funders will want to ensure that the PPP project is structured in such a way as to give
them an acceptable level of risk protection. Typically, the banks will require full
disclosure of all PPP project information and data so that they can conduct their own
due diligence to understand the PPP project risks and, ultimately, fix their lending rates
and fees.
Some of the key ways the SPV will protect itself is through its limited liability, and by
passing through the risks contained in the project agreement to the construction and
O&M contractors. It will also expect these contractors to provide it with guarantees
from their parent companies. These parent company guarantees (PCGs) will ensure
that if the contractors fail to carry out their contractual obligations, then the parent
companies will assume responsibility for the obligations and/or provide financial
compensation to the SPV to cover the cost of the failure.
The funders will also adopt a series of key approaches to protect themselves against
the adverse effect of the PPP project’s risks. They will want to ensure that the passing
through of risks into the construction and O&M contracts is appropriate. The funders
will therefore scrutinize the passing down of obligations as part of their due diligence.
They will expect to see the allocation of risk as per table 6A.3 in section 6.7.3.
25Funding documents will not be finalized until all commercial elements of the project have been agreed.
Consequently, the procurement timetable should factor in a number of additional weeks after the commercial
agreement for concluding the finance documents.
95

Additionally the funders will want to ensure the guarantee of equity/ subordinated debt
subscriptions and the subordination of all other debt. The funders will also require a
right of step-in to a failing PPP project to help ensure it gets ‘back on track’ in terms of
performance. The step-in rights are set out in the “direct agreement” that is entered
into with the procuring authority, SPV, and the funders.
6.8.3 Finance Documents and Their Review
The key financing documents are those that govern the terms of the funding provided
to the SPV and the security for the money lent. The key document is the credit or loan
agreement that sets out the types of funds that the funders will provide to the SPV.
The funds, although provided under one loan agreement, will actually contain a
number of “ring-fenced” amounts, known as “facilities” that can only be used for their
agreed purpose.
The credit agreement is a baseline facility that will provide the SPV with funds to meet
the costs of construction and other pre-agreed costs that arise during the construction
period when the PPP project is not yet generating revenue.
The credit agreement will also include other facilities to be used as working capital to
cover the costs of implementing changes in law, or to meet life-cycle and maintenance
costs.
Like any other domestic loan, the credit agreement will set out how and when money
can be borrowed (that is, the draw-down requirements), and how and when it has to
be paid (that is, the loan repayment formula or repayment schedule). Typically, the
repayment of the PPP project debt will take place over the life of the PPP project on a
reducing basis. Usually the repayment schedule follows the PPP project’s cash flow
projections.
The funders will also require the credit agreement to contain measures to ensure the
financial robustness of the PPP project on an ongoing basis. These measures are
known as the financial ratios, and they should not be breached by the SPV. Ratios are
normally calculated and checked by the funders and the SPV every 6 months. The two
most common ratios that will have to be met are as follows.
• Loan Life Cover Ratio (LLCR) – this is used to measure the ability of the SPV
to pay back the funds. At any given point it compares the project’s projected
Net Present Value (NPV) of the cash flow available for debt repayment and the
amount of project debt remaining; and
• Annual Debt Service Cover Ratio (ADSCR) – this is used to compare the past
12 months of the project’s Net Present Value (NPV) of the cash flow for debt
repayment and the amount of debt repaid (principal and interests) during the
96

same period, as well as the projected cash levels for the coming 12 months to
the amount of debt due to be repaid.26
The finance documents will also include the security package that the funders take as
their security for lending to the SPV. See box 6A.7. The security deed sets out what
security the funders have taken over the PPP project revenues and assets. The
funders will want to have the right to protect their interests in the PPP project,
especially if the PPP project gets into trouble. Therefore, the funders will enter into
direct agreements with the SPV and the construction and O&M contractors; this is so
they can step into these contracts and take over the running and role of the SPV should
the PPP project get into difficulty. Once the funders have got the project back on track
they will then step-out and the PPP project will continue to run with the SPV in control.
BOX 6A.7: Funding Documents

Finance Purpose Key Terms Meaning of Key
Document within the Terms
Document
Credit Agreement To provide funds Amount lent to Monies used to
to finance the PPP the SPV finance the
project. project.
It will contain the
terms and Price/Fee Costs of funds,
conditions including the
governing the margin.
provision of the Draw-down Dates for receiving
funds. requirements funds from the
lender.
Loan repayment Period over which
profile the borrowed
money has to be
repaid.
Representations Assurances given
and warranties by the SPV as a
precondition of
receiving the
funds.
Covenants Assurances given
by the SPV that it
will conduct itself in
26The value of the required ADSCR will depend on project risk and the variability of cash flows. If the SPV does
not take demand risk, the minimum ADSCR would typically be: c. 1.2x -1.3x. However if the SPV accepts large
demand risk, a minimum ADSCR c. 2.0x would be required.
97

a way agreed by
the funders.
Financial Measures to
covenants/ratios ensure financial
robustness.
Default events Circumstances
that can lead to the
project agreement
terminating.
Security Deed Sets out the Security is taken
security taken by over all of the
the senior funders project’s
for lending money documents and
to the SPV. As assets including:
such it will
necessarily
supplement the Project contracts This includes the
Credit Agreement. project agreement,
construction and
O&M contracts.
Project accounts Contains the
revenues
generated from the
project and the
monies that have
been received by
the SPV, including
all the facilities
monies, the
amounts sitting in
the insurance
proceeds account,
and the
maintenance and
life-cycle reserves.
Project’s physical For example, the
assets PPP facility, SPV
machinery.
Intangible project For example, the
assets SPV-owned logos,
intellectual
property, patents
generated as part
of the PPP project,
goodwill and so on.
SPV’s shares Shares held in the
project vehicle;
normally held by
the sponsors and
98

material investors
in the PPP project.
Third party Includes PCGs
guarantees and other support
to the project
provided by third
parties.
Inter-creditor Agreement to Terms regulate the
Agreement regulate the rights and
relationship obligations of co-
between co- funders.
funders
Direct Agreements Agreement that Terms provide
enables the lender funder step-in
to step into a PPP rights, allowing
project them to take over
the operation of
key project
contracts.
Project Account Overarching Terms regulate
Agreement agreement that the use made of
sets out how the accounts
following project containing project
accounts will be monies.
operated:
Debt service
reserve account
Proceeds account
Lifecycle account
Maintenance
reserve account
Compensation
account
Distributions
account
Note: O&M= operation and maintenance; PCG= parent company guarantee; SPV= special purpose
vehicle.
6.8.4 Security Package, Taking Security
The funder injects a significant amount of money into the PPP project, so it needs to
protect itself and ensure that it will get paid back all of the money it has lent, together
with the interest on the monies lent.
Full payment to the funder is predicated on the PPP project asset having been built
and operated in a manner that generates sufficient revenue to make the debt
repayment. To help ensure that, as far as is possible, this will happen in the future, the
funder will, before lending, carry out due diligence on the PPP project to satisfy itself
of the following conditions.
99

• The anticipated project cash flows are sufficient to pay off the debt;
• Payment to it will take priority over payment to any of the other funders; and
• There is additional support provided to protect it against any shortfall in the
project’s cash flows. For example, a parent company guarantee may be
required from construction sub-contractors.
Similar to the formation of the SPV, although the procuring authority is not
normally involved in the process of obtaining the PPP project funding, it will
nevertheless be good practice for it to have an understanding of how the PPP
project funding will work for a variety of reasons, including:
• To provide it with confidence that the consortium’s proposed financing
solution is viable. There will be no point in awarding the PPP project to
a consortium that cannot get its proposal financed;
• To reveal how incentivized the senior funder is to ensure the success of
the PPP project. The more debt borrowed, the greater this will be.
Awareness of this should provide the procuring authority with a level of
assurance that the PPP project will be delivered as anticipated; and
• To know a PPP project’s gearing will help reveal how the PPP project
will respond to future changes. The more debt in a project, the increased
susceptibility to revenue fluctuations. For example, it is generally
accepted that if there is a recession, then user-pay PPP project’s
revenues can decrease. Should this happen, there will be less money to
pay off the debt. Knowing the effect of reducing revenues will help
determine if there need to be changes in the finance solution to mitigate
the effects of a future revenue shortfall. In practice, this might mean that
a procuring authority’s financial advisers will ask the consortium to
review and further optimize the financial solution set out in its RFP
response.
The funders will need to be satisfied that the projected PPP project cash flows are
sufficient and secure enough to support the successful implementation of the PPP
project and the re-payment of the money lent to the SPV. When “taking security” is
referred to in a PPP project financing, it means the extent to which the repayment
obligation of the SPV is secured.
The funders focus on the potential cash flows of a PPP project because this is the
main source for repaying the debt. During the PPP project’s Construction Phase, no
revenue will be generated because the procuring authority will not be receiving a
service and so the rule, “no service, no fee” applies. Following completion of
construction, however, the PPP asset will begin to generate revenue, whether that is
through the provision of government or users’ fees to the SPV.
6.8.4.1 Project Revenues
The structure of the PPP project has been set out earlier. For the purposes of
understanding the flow of monies between parties, in order to ensure a successful
PPP project financing, the structure can be overlaid with the following arrangements
as outlined in figure 6A.14 and box 6A.8.
100

FIGURE: 6A.14: Money Flows between the Parties to a Project Financing
BOX 6A.8: Money Flows between Project Finance Agreements

Agreement Name Money Passing between Parties
Project Agreement Unitary charge payment from the
procuring authority to the SPV.
Loan Agreement SPV payment of debt service.
Senior debt interest and repayments SPV payment of senior debt and
interest to the senior funders.
Equity and subordinated debt SPV payment of dividends and

subordinated debt distributions.
Construction contract Construction contract payment from

SPV to the Construction Contractor
(CC).
Construction Sub-contract Construction Subcontract from the CC

to the Construction Subcontractor.
101

Operation and Maintenance Facilities management payment from
Agreement SPV to O&M Contractor.
Facilities Management Sub-contract Facilities Management Subcontractor

payment from the O&M Contractor to
the Facilities Management (FM) Sub-
contractor.
Revenue generation is therefore a major source of debt repayment. As a result, the

funders will take a keen interest in the financial model and the structure of the payment
mechanism. This is because they are the key determinants of how likely the project
will be able to meet its financial obligations.
The PPP project funders will conduct a series of sensitivities to ensure that the
project’s cash flow projections are subject to as little risk as possible. Funders will
therefore perform the following tasks:
• Carry out due diligence on project running costs, and perform technical checks
on costing and life-cycle assumptions;
• Check to ensure that the risks have been passed through from the SPV to the
construction and O&M contractors and their sub-contractors;
• Identify ways of eliminating potential risks. For example, they may require the
SPV to enter into a hedging agreement to offset the effect of interest rate
fluctuations;
• Ensure the provision of adequate step-in rights;
• Require the inclusion of the funders’ “permission to act” clauses in the loan
documentation;
• Require the satisfaction of financial covenants in the loan agreements, including
requirements to build up cash levels to meet debt service payments in advance
of the payment becoming payable as well as retaining cash levels in excess of
those required to service debt;
• Require cash retention for debt service and major works or operating costs;
• Check the assignment of the benefit of the contracts between the SPV and the
procuring authority, including the income stream that the contracts will generate
in the future; and
• Request that the procuring authority provide additional information and
clarification on issues arising as part of the due diligence exercise.
6.8.4.2 Main Forms of Security Documentation
The main forms of security that the funders require in a PPP project include the
following:
102

Equity subscription agreement: The funders will require seeing a minimum amount
of equity provided by the sponsors, and the funders will take security over the SPV
shares.
Bank guarantees: The bank will require security in the form of guarantees to be given
in respect of the construction and O&M contracts. These guarantees are normally
given to the SPV by the parent company of the relevant contractor. The guarantees
cover the due diligence and proper performance of the contractor’s obligations under
the relevant contract. If the contractor fails to perform the obligations, then the parent
company will perform or procure the performance of the obligations. The parent
company will also indemnify the SPV for any losses or costs incurred as a result of the
failure of the contractor to perform. The benefit of the guarantees are assigned to the
bank, and if there is a default the bank can enforce the guarantees as appropriate.
Parent company guarantees: See bank guarantees above.
Completion guarantees: The SPV may be required to obtain from the construction
contractor a guarantee that assures construction completion.
Income and shortfall guarantees: The SPV may be required to obtain an insurance
type policy that pays out for loss of income.
Pre-payment of loans: The funders may require milestone payments of loans.
Letters of comfort: The funders may require the procuring authority to provide letters
of support to the SPV, guaranteeing that the government-pays charge will be met.
Fixed and floating charge/debentures: The funders may take a debenture over the
SPV as security for the senior debt. A debenture will charge all the property, assets,
and SPV’s undertakings in favor of the funders. The debenture will generally create
fixed charges over all of the SPV’s investments, land interests, plant and machinery,
rights to insurance proceeds, book and other debts as well as the SPV’s Intellectual
Property Rights (IPR), monies and uncalled capital. The debenture will also create a
floating charge over all of the SPV’s assets that are not otherwise effectively
mortgaged or charged under the fixed charges referred to above. The benefit of a fixed
charge over specified assets is that it gives the funder priority over preferential
creditors on enforcement. The benefit of a floating charge is that at crystallization the
funder can block the appointment of an administrator over the SPV by appointing an
administrative receiver.
Step-in rights: Such rights are normally contained in “direct agreements”. Direct
agreements are normally tri-partite and entered into between the procuring authority,
the SPV, and the funder.
Direct agreements: The funders will have the right to step into a project contract and
assume the rights and obligations of the SPV.
103

Collateral warranties: Under a collateral warranty, a party contracting with the SPV,
such as a professional adviser (for example, an engineer or architect), will give certain
undertakings and warranties directly to the funder. Typically, these would include the
professional adviser accepting it owes a duty of care to the funder; and agreeing that
the work it carries out will be “fit for purpose”, will comply with accepted industry best
practice; and that it will maintain a specified amount of insurance cover for a minimum
period. The funders may require assignment/novation of these warranties.
Insurance: The bank will require the SPV to put in place certain project insurances,
and these will be assigned by way of security to the bank. Such insurances will include
insurance against physical damage or loss, third party liability, delay in startup and
business interruption. As the insurances are assigned to the bank, the SPV is required
to give notices of assignment to the insurer.
6.9 Commercial and Financial Close
Commercial close means the point at which all the significant commercial issues
between the procuring authority and the consortium have been agreed. However, at
the commercial close stage, it may be the case that the SPV still has to be formed or
that the PPP project funding needs to be obtained or finalized. It is not necessary for
commercial close and financial close to take place simultaneously, or indeed to occur
in quick succession. Although these two scenarios are the most frequent in project
financing, it can be the case that financial close will happen some months/years after
commercial close.
A project is said to have reached financial close when all the project documentation
has been signed, all the pre-conditions attached to the PPP project’s financing have
been met, and the PPP project funding becomes available. The flowing of the funds
into the PPP project means that the SPV and its construction contractor can start to
carry out the construction works to build the facility.
There are many pre-conditions, sometimes more than 100, that have to be met. The
pre-conditions are referred to as “conditions precedent”. The conditions precedents
have to be provided/met by the PPP project parties prior to triggering financial close.
Generally they can be divided into 3 categories.
• Procuring authority pre-conditions: Provision of the procuring authority’s

consent to enter into the transaction;
• SPV preconditions: Formation of the SPV; provision of board minutes
authorizing the entering into the PPP project; and provision of the required
security from the SPV and its construction and O&M contractors; and
• Lender preconditions: Internal approval by its investment committee and
entering into the funding swap.
104

Commercial close and financial close involve an intense period of activity for all parties
as all the project commercial issues and documents need to be finalized. Final
negotiations between the parties will take place, with the inevitable trade-offs being
made on issues and costs.
The procuring authority will be responsible for preparing the project agreement.
However, the balance of the project documentation — construction and O&M
contracts, funding documents, and shareholder agreements (for details see the legal
solution section above) — will be prepared by the private parties to the PPP project.
105

Chapter 6 Tendering Awarding Contract

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 6 Tendering Awarding Contract

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The APMG Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Certification Guide

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

1. Where We are in the Project Cycle

FIGURE 6.1: Where We are in the Process Cycle

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

• To conduct a smooth procurement process and avoid interruptions and re-

• Design the RFP appropriately: The procuring authority’s ability to

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

3. Special Characteristics of the PPP Tender Process

• Interaction with the market/bidders: As explained in previous chapters,

• Risks of challenges to the process: Due to the incremental complexity

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

The room for potential non-compliance with the proposal requirements is

• Contract signature or commercial close2. Prior conditions: In a PPP,

2 “Commercial close” is another term for contract signature.

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

4. Overview of the Phase

• Pre-qualification (in open tenders with a pre-qualification stage) or short

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

• Tender advertising and issuance;

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

Note: RFQ= Request for Qualification; SoQ=Submission of Qualification.

• Qualification preparation (up to submission of qualifications);

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

Note: RFQ= Request for Qualification; SoQ=Submission of Qualification.

5. Time to Prepare and Submit Offers: Requirements for Proper

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

TABLE 6.1: Examples of Bidding Periods in Different Countries

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

Hospital da Zona Single-stage open

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

6.1. Launching the Tender Process4

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

BOX 6.3: Targeting Potential Bidders as Part of the Prelaunch

• Publishing information on the internet.

6.2. Bid Stage

• The procurement team and the procuring authority will usually do

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

6.3. Clarifications of the Contract and RFP

6.4. Assessing Potential Changes to the Contract and RFP

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

6.5. Being Responsive

6.6. Open Meetings

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

6.7. Asking for Extensions

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

8. Specific Matters on Managing Dialogue and Interactive

• The interaction process itself (meetings, information to be submitted

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

8.1. Managing the Risk of Meetings with Individual Bidders

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

• Rules for conduct of the meetings are circulated to all participants in

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG

9.1. Administrative or Compliance Check

9.2. Evaluation Committees

© 2016 ADB, EBRD, IDB, IsDB, and WBG